-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 443
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
Fixed usage of uninitialized variables in TESTING #961
Fixed usage of uninitialized variables in TESTING #961
Conversation
…tential garbage data influencing the test evaluations.
schkqp3rk.f, and zchkqp3rk.f to use the leading dimension (LDA) instead of the fixed size (M)
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #961 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 0.00% 0.00%
=======================================
Files 1930 1930
Lines 190421 190421
=======================================
Misses 190421 190421 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Btw. I'm wondering why the codecov.io report always shows 0%. If I create a report locally with gcovr it shows me 82%. Just in case anyone has an idea how to fix that. The pipeline shows nothing out of the ordinary. |
@ACSimon33 thanks for the MR! LGTM! I have one question: should we zero out
and if test is failed for one |
Consolidated the initialization of the RESULT array and the reporting of test outcomes for the xCHKQP3RK tests. The initialization of the RESULT array to zeros is now occurring immediately before the tests, ensuring a clean slate without scattering across different test phases. Reporting functionality has been centralized at the end of the 5 tests, eliminating redundant blocks and improving maintainability.
@dklyuchinskiy Yes, you're right. I moved the initialization into the inner loop. I also refactored some of the indentation and put the error reporting at the end of the loop. |
That seems not the only issue with uninitialized values in Lines 760 to 766 in d7ea9c5
MAXC2NRM is used before set the first time.
This also affects Lines 760 to 767 in d7ea9c5
But in its real counterparts we have Lines 750 to 760 in d7ea9c5
and Lines 750 to 760 in d7ea9c5
|
Hi @ACSimon33! Let's finish this PR? I have found one typo inside Problem, found by @grisuthedragon maybe is out of scope of this PR, but of course it is also important. |
@dklyuchinskiy Fixed the typo. I think this is ready to be merged |
Thanks a lot! Agree. @langou please review |
Description
Thanks to @dklyuchinskiy, we were able to fix #956, which was caused by an initialized
RESULT
vector in the testing routines for the truncated QR routines.Also, we changed the index calculation in one of the tests to use
LDA
instead ofM
. This has no impact on the test itself because for all variations that this test uses, it is always guaranteed thatLDA == M
, but it is a little bit more consistent.Closes #956
Checklist