Closed tcojean closed 5 months ago
Attention: Patch coverage is 91.90069%
with 199 lines
in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
Project coverage is 90.03%. Comparing base (
49242ff
) to head (e7b0127
).
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
diff --git a/benchmark/test/test_framework.py.in b/benchmark/test/test_framework.py.in
diff --git a/benchmark/test/test_framework.py.in b/benchmark/test/test_framework.py.in
index 48f3ca608b..62c4293e7c 100644
--- a/benchmark/test/test_framework.py.in
+++ b/benchmark/test/test_framework.py.in
@@ -22,7 +22,8 @@ denumberify_paths = [
"rhs_norm",
"max_relative_norm2",
]
-detypenameify_key_starts = ["generate(", "apply(", "advanced_apply(", "copy(", "check("]
+detypenameify_key_starts = [
+ "generate(", "apply(", "advanced_apply(", "copy(", "check("]
empty_string_paths = ["filename"]
empty_array_paths = [
"recurrent_residuals",
@@ -148,9 +149,7 @@ def compare_output_impl(
)
)
ignore_patterns = [
- "This is Ginkgo", # version numbers + tag
- " the .* module is", # version numbers + tag
- " running with core module", # version numbers + tag
+ " the .* module is", # version numbers
"DEBUG: (begin|end ) (allocate|free)", # allocations
]
typename_patterns = [
@@ -179,7 +178,8 @@ def compare_output_impl(
ignore_patterns=ignore_patterns,
replace_patterns=typename_patterns,
empty_string_paths = ["filename"]
empty_array_paths = [
"recurrent_residuals",
@@ -148,9 +149,7 @@ def compare_output_impl(
)
)
ignore_patterns = [
- "This is Ginkgo", # version numbers + tag
- " the .* module is", # version numbers + tag
- " running with core module", # version numbers + tag
+ " the .* module is", # version numbers
"DEBUG: (begin|end ) (allocate|free)", # allocations
]
typename_patterns = [
@@ -179,7 +178,8 @@ def compare_output_impl(
ignore_patterns=ignore_patterns,
replace_patterns=typename_patterns,
)
- expected_stdout_processed = sanitize_json_text(open(expected_stdout).read())
+ expected_stdout_processed = sanitize_json_text(
+ open(expected_stdout).read())
expected_stderr_processed = sanitize_text(
open(expected_stderr).read(),
ignore_patterns=ignore_patterns,
@@ -190,7 +190,8 @@ def compare_output_impl(
print("FAIL: stdout differs")
print(
"\n".join(
- difflib.unified_diff(expected_stdout_processed, result_stdout_processed)
+ difflib.unified_diff(
+ expected_stdout_processed, result_stdout_processed)
)
)
failed = True
@@ -198,7 +199,8 @@ def compare_output_impl(
print("FAIL: stderr differs")
print(
"\n".join(
- difflib.unified_diff(expected_stderr_processed, result_stderr_processed)
+ difflib.unified_diff(
+ expected_stderr_processed, result_stderr_processed)
)
)
failed = True
this is diff between develop and this branch
I think the ignore_patterns
should be the same
I will also suggest revert other format changes in this file to keep the master and develop less gap
the following changes in stderr are unnecessary
+This is Ginkgo 1.8.0 (master)
+ running with core module 1.8.0 (master)
Thanks for catching this diff Mike, now the diff with develop looks good. I have no idea where all this came from
Error: The following files need to be formatted:
accessor/accessor_helper.hpp
accessor/block_col_major.hpp
accessor/cuda_helper.hpp
accessor/hip_helper.hpp
accessor/index_span.hpp
accessor/math.hpp
accessor/range.hpp
accessor/reduced_row_major.hpp
accessor/reduced_row_major_reference.hpp
accessor/reference_helper.hpp
accessor/row_major.hpp
accessor/scaled_reduced_row_major.hpp
accessor/scaled_reduced_row_major_reference.hpp
accessor/utils.hpp
dev_tools/oneapi/fake_interface/cooperative_groups.cuh
dev_tools/oneapi/working_directory/trick/cooperative_groups.hpp
dev_tools/oneapi/working_directory/trick/dim3_t.hpp
dev_tools/oneapi/working_directory/trick/reduction.hpp
dev_tools/oneapi/working_directory/trick/sorting.hpp
dev_tools/oneapi/working_directory/trick/thread_ids.hpp
examples/adaptiveprecision-blockjacobi/adaptiveprecision-blockjacobi.cpp
examples/cb-gmres/cb-gmres.cpp
examples/custom-matrix-format/custom-matrix-format.cpp
examples/custom-matrix-format/stencil_kernel.cu
examples/custom-stopping-criterion/custom-stopping-criterion.cpp
examples/ginkgo-overhead/ginkgo-overhead.cpp
examples/ginkgo-ranges/ginkgo-ranges.cpp
examples/heat-equation/heat-equation.cpp
examples/ilu-preconditioned-solver/ilu-preconditioned-solver.cpp
examples/inverse-iteration/inverse-iteration.cpp
examples/ir-ilu-preconditioned-solver/ir-ilu-preconditioned-solver.cpp
examples/iterative-refinement/iterative-refinement.cpp
examples/minimal-cuda-solver/minimal-cuda-solver.cpp
examples/mixed-multigrid-preconditioned-solver/mixed-multigrid-preconditioned-solver.cpp
examples/mixed-multigrid-solver/mixed-multigrid-solver.cpp
examples/mixed-precision-ir/mixed-precision-ir.cpp
examples/multigrid-preconditioned-solver-customized/multigrid-preconditioned-solver-customized.cpp
examples/multigrid-preconditioned-solver/multigrid-preconditioned-solver.cpp
examples/nine-pt-stencil-solver/nine-pt-stencil-solver.cpp
examples/papi-logging/papi-logging.cpp
examples/performance-debugging/performance-debugging.cpp
examples/poisson-solver/poisson-solver.cpp
examples/preconditioned-solver/preconditioned-solver.cpp
examples/preconditioner-export/preconditioner-export.cpp
examples/schroedinger-splitting/schroedinger-splitting.cpp
examples/simple-solver-logging/simple-solver-logging.cpp
examples/three-pt-stencil-solver/three-pt-stencil-solver.cpp
include/ginkgo/core/log/papi.hpp
third_party/SuiteSparse/wrapper32.cpp
third_party/SuiteSparse/wrapper64.cpp
You can find a formatting patch under Artifacts here or run format!
if you have write access to Ginkgo
Issues
286 New issues
47 Accepted issues
Measures
9 Security Hotspots
77.3% Coverage on New Code
7.0% Duplication on New Code
There seems to be some issue with format ? Is that expected ?
The format job relies on the base branch (master) which isn't the same format as develop. The format bot is incorrect. Maybe in the future we should base all GithubCI scripts on develop, like we do for e.g. the mirroring
I think we should try to stick with pull_request_target
for security reasons, basing things on develop
would be a bit harder.
In that vein, I actually have a suggestion: We would have much less work if master
was closer to develop
- what we could do there would be after merging the release PR into develop
, we could create a commit setting the tag to master
and immediately revert it, pointing master
to the intermediate state before reversal. That way, commits between master
and develop
are not duplicated, and we have little to no effort in reviewing release PRs to master
.
This should be the same as #1621 but for the master branch, including all the updated commits.
Please check the README extensively, as it is the main point of failure (changes develop -> master) together with the main CMakeLists.txt