Summary: ARM backend: Add skip markers for 16A8W quantization known t…

[psiddh]

…est failures

Added skip functionality (because buck based targets do not seem to comply with xfail marker) to the test parametrize framework to handle known failing tests in ARM backend 16A8W quantization. The model_linear_rank4_zeros, model_linear_rank4_negative_ones, and model_linear_rank4_negative_large_rand test cases are now skipped due to bias quantization accuracy issues tracked in MLETORCH-1452. This prevents buck based CI from blocking while maintaining visibility of the known issues through proper test annotations.

Test Plan:

Reviewers:

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

Summary

[PLEASE REMOVE] See CONTRIBUTING.md's Pull Requests for ExecuTorch PR guidelines.

[PLEASE REMOVE] If this PR closes an issue, please add a Fixes #<issue-id> line.

[PLEASE REMOVE] If this PR introduces a fix or feature that should be the upcoming release notes, please add a "Release notes: " label. For a list of available release notes labels, check out CONTRIBUTING.md's Pull Requests.

Test plan

[PLEASE REMOVE] How did you test this PR? Please write down any manual commands you used and note down tests that you have written if applicable.

[pytorch-bot]

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/executorch/15514

• 📄 Preview Python docs built from this PR

Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed.

❗ 1 Active SEVs

There are 1 currently active SEVs. If your PR is affected, please view them below:

• [ROCm][CI] Machines under the label linux.rocm.gpu.2, label linux.rocm.gpu.4, linux.rocm.gpu.gfx1100 are undergoing maintenance.

✅ No Failures

As of commit a03e6cf with merge base a11d555 ():
💚 Looks good so far! There are no failures yet. 💚

This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes.

[github-actions]

This PR needs a release notes: label

If your change should be included in the release notes (i.e. would users of this library care about this change?), please use a label starting with release notes:. This helps us keep track and include your important work in the next release notes.

To add a label, you can comment to pytorchbot, for example
@pytorchbot label "release notes: none"

For more information, see
https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/PyTorch-AutoLabel-Bot#why-categorize-for-release-notes-and-how-does-it-work.

[AdrianLundell]

Seems a bit strange to me that xfails would not work for a particular test case, or am I misunderstanding something? Also, if this is a temporary fix I would prefer if you could break out the odd test cases into a new test and skip that rather than modifying the testing infrastructure.

[psiddh]

Seems a bit strange to me that xfails would not work for a particular test case, or am I misunderstanding something? Also, if this is a temporary fix I would prefer if you could break out the odd test cases into a new test and skip that rather than modifying the testing infrastructure.

Not sure if this is modifying any testing infra. It is only adding 'skip' marker to parameter impl as fwd fix. Only for the tests that are failing on internal CI (buck based), added the skip marker for now so that we don't have to backout a PR , satisfying both OSS CI & internal buck based CI. We can discuss a cleaner fix if you have better ideas / suggestions but we need to keep the CI train for now moving as it has been stalled since Friday due to these issues