search

qiboteam / qibolab

Quantum hardware module and drivers for Qibo.
https://qibo.science
Apache License 2.0
40 stars 10 forks source link

Qibosoq update and bugfixes #843

Closed rodolfocarobene closed 2 months ago

rodolfocarobene commented 3 months ago

I am currently working with a ZCU216 that is presenting (regardless of qibo*) a weird behavior, so this for sure will require testing with a working board and maybe even with qubits...

Checklist:

codecov[bot] commented 3 months ago

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 10 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 66.57%. Comparing base (082c505) to head (3943187).

Files Patch % Lines
src/qibolab/instruments/rfsoc/driver.py 66.66% 10 Missing :warning:
Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #843 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 66.75% 66.57% -0.18% ========================================== Files 55 55 Lines 5917 5939 +22 ========================================== + Hits 3950 3954 +4 - Misses 1967 1985 +18 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/qiboteam/qibolab/pull/843/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=qiboteam) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/qiboteam/qibolab/pull/843/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=qiboteam) | `66.57% <66.66%> (-0.18%)` | :arrow_down: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=qiboteam#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

rodolfocarobene commented 3 months ago

This works fine locally, but I'm making it fail so that I'm reminded that a release of qibosoq 0.1.2 is required

rodolfocarobene commented 3 months ago

Hi @stavros11, @Jacfomg, @hay-k. I did some fixes for the rfsoc driver. One of these required to change the __add__ function for the IntegratedResult object (this was connected to the shape error we were seeing in routines with errors).

The rfsoc seems now to behave well, but I'm afraid I could have broken other drivers... Are you aware of drivers that used the __add__ function?

stavros11 commented 3 months ago

The rfsoc seems now to behave well, but I'm afraid I could have broken other drivers... Are you aware of drivers that used the __add__ function?

This is not used by the QM driver so no problem on that front. I am not sure about other drivers. Generally, I would even prefer dropping __add__ at some point (not this PR) to freeze result objects (if we keep them). We had a related discussion with @hay-k @alecandido somewhere.

Jacfomg commented 3 months ago

I don't think is used on zhinst or in the unrolling.

rodolfocarobene commented 2 months ago

Hi, could someone please take some time to review this? I know the RFSoC platform is not much used right now, but it would be really appreciated :-)

alecandido commented 2 months ago

:tada: