Skip to content

Tests fail #917

New issue
New issue
Closed
#1021
Closed
Tests fail#917
#1021
@yurivict

Description

@yurivict
yurivict
opened on Apr 8, 2023
-- xsimd v11.0.0
-- Tests build type is Release
-- Configuring done
-- Generating done
-- Build files have been written to: /usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/.build
ninja: no work to do.
[  0% 1/1] cd /usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/.build && /usr/local/bin/ctest --force-new-ctest-process
Test project /usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/.build
    Start 1: test_xsimd
1/1 Test #1: test_xsimd .......................***Failed    0.52 sec
[doctest] doctest version is "2.4.11"
[doctest] run with "--help" for options
===============================================================================
/usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/xsimd-11.0.0/test/test_xsimd_api.cpp:695:
TEST CASE:  [xsimd api | float types functions]<float>
  exp10

/usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/xsimd-11.0.0/test/test_xsimd_api.cpp:466: ERROR: CHECK_EQ( extract(xsimd::exp10(T(val))), std::pow(value_type(10), val) ) is NOT correct!
  values: CHECK_EQ( 100, 100 )

===============================================================================
/usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/xsimd-11.0.0/test/test_xsimd_api.cpp:695:
TEST CASE:  [xsimd api | float types functions]<double>
  exp10

/usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/xsimd-11.0.0/test/test_xsimd_api.cpp:466: ERROR: CHECK_EQ( extract(xsimd::exp10(T(val))), std::pow(value_type(10), val) ) is NOT correct!
  values: CHECK_EQ( 100, 100 )

===============================================================================
[doctest] test cases:  303 |  301 passed | 2 failed | 0 skipped
[doctest] assertions: 7929 | 7927 passed | 2 failed |
[doctest] Status: FAILURE!


0% tests passed, 1 tests failed out of 1

Total Test time (real) =   0.52 sec

The following tests FAILED:
	  1 - test_xsimd (Failed)
Errors while running CTest
FAILED: CMakeFiles/test.util

Verison: 11.0.0
clang-14
FreeBSD 13.1

Activity

serge-sans-paille

serge-sans-paille commented on Apr 11, 2023

@serge-sans-paille
serge-sans-paille
on Apr 11, 2023
Contributor

Thanks for reporting. Can you tell us if #916 fixed the issue?

serge-sans-paille

serge-sans-paille commented on Apr 25, 2023

@serge-sans-paille
serge-sans-paille
on Apr 25, 2023
Contributor

@yurivict do you still encounter the issue with latest master branch?

doronbehar

doronbehar commented on Jul 31, 2023

@doronbehar
doronbehar
on Jul 31, 2023
Contributor

Here on NixOS, we try to build 11.1.0 on MacOS, which includes #918, and it didn't fix the issue for us. See progress at NixOS/nixpkgs#246200

yurivict

yurivict commented on Nov 9, 2023

@yurivict
yurivict
on Nov 9, 2023
Author

11.2.0 still has this problem.

yurivict

yurivict commented on Feb 16, 2024

@yurivict
yurivict
on Feb 16, 2024
Author

12.1.1 still has the problem:

$ ./work/.build/test/test_xsimd
[doctest] doctest version is "2.4.11"
[doctest] run with "--help" for options
===============================================================================
/usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/xsimd-12.1.1/test/test_xsimd_api.cpp:747:
TEST CASE:  [xsimd api | float types functions]<float>
  exp10

/usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/xsimd-12.1.1/test/test_xsimd_api.cpp:524: ERROR: CHECK_EQ( extract(xsimd::exp10(T(val))), std::pow(value_type(10), val) ) is NOT correct!
  values: CHECK_EQ( 100, 100 )

===============================================================================
/usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/xsimd-12.1.1/test/test_xsimd_api.cpp:747:
TEST CASE:  [xsimd api | float types functions]<double>
  exp10

/usr/ports/devel/xsimd/work/xsimd-12.1.1/test/test_xsimd_api.cpp:524: ERROR: CHECK_EQ( extract(xsimd::exp10(T(val))), std::pow(value_type(10), val) ) is NOT correct!
  values: CHECK_EQ( 100, 100 )

===============================================================================
[doctest] test cases:  321 |  319 passed | 2 failed | 0 skipped
[doctest] assertions: 8239 | 8237 passed | 2 failed |
[doctest] Status: FAILURE!
yurivict

yurivict commented on May 3, 2024

@yurivict
yurivict
on May 3, 2024
Author

Tests are still broken in 13.0.0

serge-sans-paille

serge-sans-paille commented on May 3, 2024

@serge-sans-paille
serge-sans-paille
on May 3, 2024
Contributor

@yurivict which architecture?

yurivict

yurivict commented on May 3, 2024

@yurivict
yurivict
on May 3, 2024
Author

amd64

serge-sans-paille

serge-sans-paille commented on May 4, 2024

@serge-sans-paille
serge-sans-paille
on May 4, 2024
Contributor

and which os / compiler / libc ? Because we (obviously!) test on these arch...

doronbehar

doronbehar commented on May 5, 2024

@doronbehar
doronbehar
on May 5, 2024
Contributor

Here is a list of the tests and patches we apply to each OS / Architecture etc on NixOS:

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/67939e1d931ecee79802d9038e7ebef096d96f53/pkgs/development/libraries/xsimd/default.nix#L17-L37

serge-sans-paille
added a commit that references this issue on May 9, 2024

Loosen exp10 tests accuracy constraints

bcd7895
serge-sans-paille
mentioned this on May 9, 2024
serge-sans-paille

serge-sans-paille commented on May 9, 2024

@serge-sans-paille
serge-sans-paille
on May 9, 2024
Contributor

@yurivict does #917 do the the trick?

serge-sans-paille

serge-sans-paille commented on May 9, 2024

@serge-sans-paille
serge-sans-paille
on May 9, 2024
Contributor

and thanks @doronbehar , that did help

doronbehar

doronbehar commented on May 9, 2024

@doronbehar
doronbehar
on May 9, 2024
Contributor

@yurivict does #917 do the the trick?

You meant #1021 I suppose :).

serge-sans-paille

serge-sans-paille commented on May 9, 2024

@serge-sans-paille
serge-sans-paille
on May 9, 2024
Contributor

I do :-)

serge-sans-paille

serge-sans-paille commented on May 17, 2024

@serge-sans-paille
serge-sans-paille
on May 17, 2024
Contributor

@doronbehar so, does it fix the bug?

doronbehar

doronbehar commented on May 18, 2024

@doronbehar
doronbehar
on May 18, 2024
Contributor

Only now I had time to delve in that. :) If I understand correctly, #1021 is supposed to maybe help us only with two patches we currently apply:

I also noticed many projects in the @xtensor-stack had version updates, so I currently test the updates with our CI in NixOS/nixpkgs#312745 . It will take time as this our CI is especially needed for Darwin tests, and for those platforms it is rather slow.

doronbehar

doronbehar commented on May 21, 2024

@doronbehar
doronbehar
on May 21, 2024
Contributor

Ok so putting asside now #1024 (which (I hope) fixes #804), we didn't experience the failures reported here on any platform - including aarch64-darwin, for which it took our CI a few days to reach.

serge-sans-paille

serge-sans-paille commented on May 30, 2024

@serge-sans-paille
serge-sans-paille
on May 30, 2024
Contributor

So I think we can close this issue, feel free to reopen if CI proves me wrong.

serge-sans-paille
closed this as completedon May 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

      Development

      Participants

      @yurivict@serge-sans-paille@doronbehar

      Issue actions
        Tests fail · Issue #917 · xtensor-stack/xsimd