Skip to content

Conversation

@Flamefire
Copy link
Contributor

This checks for any errors during the numpy test suite.
Supersedes #1744

Fixes #2237
Fixes #605

@ocaisa
Copy link
Member

ocaisa commented Nov 17, 2020

@Flamefire Can you update the scipy easyblock as well for this change?

@Flamefire
Copy link
Contributor Author

Done. And with SciPy-bundle-2019.03-foss-2019a.eb I get a failure due to a precision issue -.- Same with

Those are very small failures, e.g. -0.00077271310043404 != -0.000772713100434114 (rdiff 9.569216326469691e-14) or "Arrays are not almost equal to 5 decimals" ... Max absolute difference: 1.5497208e-05

Numpy seems to be fine. Not sure what to do. I'd suggest I'll remove the scipy change so we have at least numpy tested

@ocaisa
Copy link
Member

ocaisa commented Nov 17, 2020

Let's put it in a separate PR so we can still try to address it

@ocaisa
Copy link
Member

ocaisa commented Nov 17, 2020

Was that test on POWER? Looks like this is not uncommon:
scipy/scipy#11181

@Flamefire
Copy link
Contributor Author

No, this was on Intel and AMD x86 CPUs. Split out the SciPy stuff into #2241

@Flamefire
Copy link
Contributor Author

Test report by @Flamefire

Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)

  • SUCCESS SciPy-bundle-2019.03-foss-2019a.eb
  • SUCCESS SciPy-bundle-2019.10-foss-2019b-Python-2.7.16.eb
  • SUCCESS SciPy-bundle-2019.10-foss-2019b-Python-3.7.4.eb
  • SUCCESS Python-3.6.6-foss-2018b.eb
  • SUCCESS Python-3.6.4-foss-2018a.eb

Build succeeded for 5 out of 5 (5 easyconfigs in total)
taurusi6257.taurus.hrsk.tu-dresden.de - Linux RHEL 7.8, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v3 @ 2.50GHz, Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/0a047b845b27d654b8e0bbe381e00874 for a full test report.

@migueldiascosta
Copy link
Member

lgtm

I' wondering if there should be a log message about inverting the return value, so if a future version of numpy changes the behaviour (again) and the test_steps fails although all tests pass, at least it would be immediately clear why (?)

@Flamefire
Copy link
Contributor Author

I expect the shown error message to be clear enough for that case. I would not clutter the log in anticipation of stuff that may or may not change and may or may not be obvious what changed. I mean: The test command is pretty clear: Run a test function and exit with the inverse of the result. As long as you remember that exit takes an error value and not a success value of course.

@migueldiascosta migueldiascosta added this to the 4.3.2 milestone Nov 19, 2020
Copy link
Member

@migueldiascosta migueldiascosta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@migueldiascosta
Copy link
Member

Going in, thanks @Flamefire!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Numpy (and likely scipy) test failures ignored also run numpy.test rather than only a simply numpy.dot performance test in EB_numpy.test_step

4 participants