Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(pt): loose tolerance for TransTest #3838

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 30, 2024

Conversation

njzjz
Copy link
Member

@njzjz njzjz commented May 30, 2024

The quick way to fix #3833. It still needs further fixing.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Improved precision handling in tests for better accuracy.

The quick way to fix deepmodeling#3833. It still needs further fixing.

Signed-off-by: Jinzhe Zeng <jinzhe.zeng@rutgers.edu>
@njzjz njzjz requested a review from wanghan-iapcm May 30, 2024 02:02
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented May 30, 2024

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The precision value for comparing certain keys in the dictionaries ret0 and ret1 in the test function of test_trans.py was adjusted from 1e-10 to 1e-7 to address occasional unit test failures due to minute differences in tensor values.

Changes

Files Change Summary
source/tests/pt/model/test_trans.py Adjusted precision value from 1e-10 to 1e-7 for tensor comparison

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Resolve occasional unit test failure due to precision issues (#3833)

Recent Review Details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between dd7f27a and ac1436a.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • source/tests/pt/model/test_trans.py (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
  • source/tests/pt/model/test_trans.py

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@njzjz njzjz linked an issue May 30, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 30, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.53%. Comparing base (0bcb84f) to head (ac1436a).
Report is 132 commits behind head on devel.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##            devel    #3838      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.48%   82.53%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         513      513              
  Lines       48993    49040      +47     
  Branches     2986     2987       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        40411    40473      +62     
+ Misses       7671     7656      -15     
  Partials      911      911              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@wanghan-iapcm wanghan-iapcm added this pull request to the merge queue May 30, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks May 30, 2024
@njzjz njzjz added this pull request to the merge queue May 30, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks May 30, 2024
@njzjz njzjz added this pull request to the merge queue May 30, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks May 30, 2024
@njzjz njzjz added this pull request to the merge queue May 30, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks May 30, 2024
@njzjz
Copy link
Member Author

njzjz commented May 30, 2024

I give up merging until GitHub fixes the issue.

xref:

(No reply from the GitHub side yet)

@njzjz njzjz added this pull request to the merge queue May 30, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks May 30, 2024
@njzjz njzjz added this pull request to the merge queue May 30, 2024
@njzjz
Copy link
Member Author

njzjz commented May 30, 2024

Merged via the queue into deepmodeling:devel with commit 1bb6e13 May 30, 2024
62 checks passed
@njzjz njzjz deleted the njzjz-patch-35 branch May 30, 2024 21:20
mtaillefumier pushed a commit to mtaillefumier/deepmd-kit that referenced this pull request Sep 18, 2024
The quick way to fix deepmodeling#3833. It still needs further fixing.

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->

## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **Tests**
  - Improved precision handling in tests for better accuracy.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

Signed-off-by: Jinzhe Zeng <jinzhe.zeng@rutgers.edu>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[BUG] recent occasional UT failure
2 participants