-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.8k
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
Changed all tests using random to use a seed in JIT/Methodical #50767
Changed all tests using random to use a seed in JIT/Methodical #50767
Conversation
@dotnet/jit-contrib |
@ADustyOldMuffin Thanks for your first contribution to dotnet! |
Runtime failures are unrelated . |
Thank you, I had looked through the logs and didn't think I could find anything related but I wasn't 100% if I was interpreting them correctly. |
There are two failures. The Linux arm64 checked failure is a long-standing failure in the xunit harness that orchestrates running the tests (#11063)
The windows arm64 failure is an infrastructure problem in the post-processing done after the tests finished (successfully)
I restarted the runtime-dev-innerloop failed runs since those CI legs got cancelled before they could finish. |
The changes look good, thanks, Daniel.
Are you planning to fix the tests outside of Jit/Methodical? Grep for runtime/src/tests/JIT/HardwareIntrinsics/X86/Avx/ConvertToVector128Int32.Double.cs Line 102 in 01b7e73
|
The templates for the hardware intrinsics live in:
As best as I can tell, |
Thanks I'll take a look and try and grab the rest then in JIT. |
@sandreenko I made changes to the rest of the tests I found in For the template files I couldn't find any of the calls to random, but I have also never used templates for generation so it's quite possible I don't know what I'm looking for. I might need some help in regards to those. |
looks like some changes are causing test failures, like you changed the seed in "src/tests/JIT/Performance/CodeQuality/Span/Indexer.cs" from 42 to 20010415 and now it fails with:
looks like these are bad written tests where the result depends on what Random.Next() gives us, could you please revert the changes there and try again? JIT\Performance\CodeQuality\Span\Indexer\Indexer.cmd |
Certainly, I've been slowly working through them sorry for the speed.
…On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 7:46 PM Sergey Andreenko ***@***.***> wrote:
looks like some changes are causing test failures, like you changed the
seed in "src/tests/JIT/Performance/CodeQuality/Span/Indexer.cs" from 42 to
20010415 and now it fails with:
Raw output file: C:\h\w\9FD90917\w\B9B10A34\e\JIT\Performance\Reports\JIT.Performance\CodeQuality\Span\Indexer\Indexer.output.txt
Raw output:
BEGIN EXECUTION
"C:\h\w\9FD90917\p\corerun.exe" Indexer.dll
Running as correctness test: 1 iterations
pass -bench for benchmark mode w/default iterations
pass [#iterations] for benchmark mode w/iterations
**** Span known size bounds check elimination ****
KnownSizeCtor(1024): 0.05ms -- failed to validate, got 53 expected 70
KnownSizeCtor2(1024): 0.00ms -- failed to validate, got 53 expected 70
looks like these are bad written tests where the result depends on what
Random.Next() gives us, could you please revert the changes there and try
again?
JIT\Performance\CodeQuality\Span\Indexer\Indexer.cmd
JIT\SIMD\CircleInConvex_ro\CircleInConvex_ro.cmd
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#50767 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJ3ZJWMVAJYPRDBZWPTV3HDTJTFHFANCNFSM42OACTWQ>
.
|
No worries, thank you for working on this issue! |
I made changes to the two tests that were failing, but I'm not sure if they're alright changes. I just check that the tests don't return 0 as they shouldn't be 0 at any time. Past that the only fix would be to not have them use random. I also don't think that the build failures have anything to do with these changes. |
/azp run runtime-coreclr outerloop |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
I would prefer to revert the changes in these 2 tests, I think it would align with the original issue:
these tests were using Random with a seed so they should not be changed. |
Ah apologies I misunderstood, reverted the changes to those tests. |
/azp run runtime-coreclr outerloop |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
/azp run runtime-coreclr outerloop |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thanks @ADustyOldMuffin for your continuous effort to make this change! I will be glad to see more changes from you.
Addresses #7756
I found all of the tests inside of the JIT - Methodical folders using
Random()
without a seed and put the code referenced in the thread in place to put a seed based on theCORECLR_SEED
environment variable, or to just use a default seed.Please let me know if I should include more tests in this PR, I found some more in the JIT folder but they use
Random()
in a different way so I'm unsure.This is my first PR to Dotnet so any and all feedback is welcome and appreciated!