[rocPRIM][rocThrust] Mergeback from release staging 7.0#449
Merged
umfranzw merged 3 commits intoROCm:developfrom Jul 1, 2025
Merged
[rocPRIM][rocThrust] Mergeback from release staging 7.0#449umfranzw merged 3 commits intoROCm:developfrom
umfranzw merged 3 commits intoROCm:developfrom
Conversation
Avoid GTest 128-bit value output on windows On Windows, GTest lacks the ability to print 128 bit values. This can cause linker errors if you call macros like ASSERT_EQ and pass in 128-bit values. We already avoid ASSERT_EQ with 128-bit types in a few functions in test/rocprim/test_utils_assertions.hpp. This change refactors the code that does the detection, and then adds the avoidant behaviour to a few more functions. As a part of this refactoring, the test_utils::is_int128/is_uint128 declarations are moved from test_utils_data_generation.hpp into test_utils_assertions.hpp. They're not used anywhere other than in the latter file.
… no tail (ROCm#211) thrust::tuple is implemented using a cons object. The cons object has two implementations: one for tuples with both a head and tail, and one for tuples with only a head (i.e. the tail is null). Some thrust code (eg. zip iterator) can end up calling the copy constructor (or assignment operator overload) for the head/tail version and pass in a head/null version as the source to copy from. Since there are currently no copy constructor or assignment operator overload that accept head/null, the default ones get called. These fail because they assume that a tail data member exists. This change adds specializations for the head/null version of cons so that we don't call the default ones.
assistant-librarian
bot
added
project: rocprim
project: rocthrust
organization: ROCm
labels
umfranzw
changed the title
stanleytsang-amd
previously approved these changes
Jun 30, 2025
Contributor
stanleytsang-amd
left a comment
stanleytsang-amd
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lgtm pending ci checks
We use the std::__decay built-in in place of std::decay to speed up compilation time. However, this doesn't always work on Windows. This change adds a check to avoid it there.
assistant-librarian bot
pushed a commit
to ROCm/rocPRIM
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 1, 2025
assistant-librarian bot
pushed a commit
to ROCm/rocThrust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 1, 2025
stanleytsang-amd
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 4, 2025
Reverse UseGTestAssert condition on Windows
Recently, we added a check to see if GTest's ASSERT_EQ assertion
should be used within the assert_eq function. The code in the if/else
blocks that act on the results of this check was inverted (the "else"
code block should be the "if" block, and vice-versa).
This change fixes the issue by swapping the code blocks.
This change should be merged after #449.
umfranzw
added a commit
to umfranzw/rocm-libraries
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 4, 2025
Reverse UseGTestAssert condition on Windows
Recently, we added a check to see if GTest's ASSERT_EQ assertion
should be used within the assert_eq function. The code in the if/else
blocks that act on the results of this check was inverted (the "else"
code block should be the "if" block, and vice-versa).
This change fixes the issue by swapping the code blocks.
This change should be merged after ROCm#449.
stanleytsang-amd
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2025
Reverse UseGTestAssert condition on Windows
Recently, we added a check to see if GTest's ASSERT_EQ assertion should
be used within the assert_eq function. The code in the if/else blocks
that act on the results of this check was inverted (the "else" code
block should be the "if" block, and vice-versa). This change fixes the
issue by swapping the code blocks.
This change should be merged after #449.
ammallya
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2025
Fixes ROCm/TheRock#416 [ROCm/rocSPARSEcommit: 52eccec]
ammallya
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2025
Fixes ROCm/TheRock#416 [ROCm/rocSPARSE commit: 52eccec]
JeniferC99
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2025
JeniferC99
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2025
Reverse UseGTestAssert condition on Windows
Recently, we added a check to see if GTest's ASSERT_EQ assertion
should be used within the assert_eq function. The code in the if/else
blocks that act on the results of this check was inverted (the "else"
code block should be the "if" block, and vice-versa).
This change fixes the issue by swapping the code blocks.
This change should be merged after #449.
eidenyoshida
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 25, 2025
Reverse win gtest condition Reverse UseGTestAssert condition on Windows Recently, we added a check to see if GTest's ASSERT_EQ assertion should be used within the assert_eq function. The code in the if/else blocks that act on the results of this check was inverted (the "else" code block should be the "if" block, and vice-versa). This change fixes the issue by swapping the code blocks. This change should be merged after #449.
stanleytsang-amd
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2025
Reverse UseGTestAssert condition on Windows
Recently, we added a check to see if GTest's ASSERT_EQ assertion
should be used within the assert_eq function. The code in the if/else
blocks that act on the results of this check was inverted (the "else"
code block should be the "if" block, and vice-versa).
This change fixes the issue by swapping the code blocks.
This change should be merged after #449.
bsyrowik
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 27, 2025
…aphy-43.0.1 Bump cryptography from 42.0.8 to 43.0.1 in /docs/sphinx [ROCm/rocWMMA commit: a5038f4]
ammallya
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 27, 2025
…aphy-43.0.1 Bump cryptography from 42.0.8 to 43.0.1 in /docs/sphinx
ammallya
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 28, 2025
…aphy-43.0.1 Bump cryptography from 42.0.8 to 43.0.1 in /docs/sphinx [ROCm/rocwmma commit: a5038f4]
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This change merges back the following PRs from release-staging: