Your message dated Sat, 06 Apr 2024 14:34:11 +0000
with message-id <e1rt77t-002lig...@fasolo.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#1068100: fixed in armci-mpi 
0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1068100,
regarding armci-mpi: autopkgtest spuriously fails
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
1068100: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1068100
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: armci-mpi
Version: 0.3.1~beta-7
Severity: serious
Tags: patch upstream fixed-upstream
Forwarded: https://github.com/pmodels/armci-mpi/pull/47
Justification: Prevents mpich migration

Hello,

The test_mpi_indexed_gets test is currently failing spuriously
in debian unstable due to an uninitialized value, e.g.
https://ci.debian.net/packages/a/armci-mpi/testing/amd64/44486187/ ,
preventing the newer mpich version from migrating to unstable.

I have forwarded a fix to upstream
https://github.com/pmodels/armci-mpi/pull/47
which is already merged.

Unless somebody objects, I'll NMU it.

Samuel

-- System Information:
Debian Release: trixie/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'unreleased'), 
(500, 'testing-debug'), (500, 'stable-security'), (500, 'stable-debug'), (500, 
'oldstable-proposed-updates-debug'), (500, 'oldstable-proposed-updates'), (500, 
'oldoldstable'), (500, 'buildd-unstable'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), 
(500, 'oldstable'), (1, 'experimental-debug'), (1, 'buildd-experimental'), (1, 
'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386, arm64

Kernel: Linux 6.8.0 (SMP w/8 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled
commit 80cc91748392aec9eced295eb531548a565dac0e
Author: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org>
Date:   Sat Mar 30 16:35:11 2024 +0100

    tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c: Fix reception buffer initialization
    
    loc_buf was completely uninitialized, while the second and third loop nests
    are checking that the values are 1.0 + rank. With luck it would be zero, and
    thus the actual - expected > 1e-10 check would pass (since the difference is
    then negative). With less luck the check would spuriously fail for the part
    that is not overwritten by the MPI_Get.
    
    Signed-off-by: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org>

commit 9c0f6b08ba706a7c2f3e74d325cfd2a010300108
Author: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org>
Date:   Sat Mar 30 16:38:58 2024 +0100

    tests/mpi: Fix comparison of floating-double types
    
    In case the actual value is zero and the expected value is positive, the
    check would spuriously succeed.
    
    Signed-off-by: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org>

commit cd001a46801fed9f406ea57238a131b0a0e063fe
Author: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org>
Date:   Sat Mar 30 16:41:58 2024 +0100

    tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c: Strengthen test
    
    Now that it is fixed, we can make it actually perform strided accesses.
    
    Signed-off-by: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org>

diff --git a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c 
b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c
index dc1bd9d..3570492 100644
--- a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c
+++ b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c
@@ -44,8 +44,10 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
     if (rank == 0)
         printf("MPI RMA Strided Get Test:\n");
 
-    for (i = 0; i < XDIM*YDIM; i++)
+    for (i = 0; i < XDIM*YDIM; i++) {
         *(win_buf + i) = 1.0 + rank;
+        *(loc_buf + i) = 1.0 + rank;
+    }
 
     MPI_Win_create(win_buf, bufsize, 1, MPI_INFO_NULL, MPI_COMM_WORLD, 
&buf_win);
 
diff --git a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_accs.c b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_accs.c
index ee9b0a9..730a632 100644
--- a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_accs.c
+++ b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_accs.c
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = 0; j < YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(buffer + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = (1.0 + rank) + (1.0 + 
((rank+nranks-1)%nranks)) * (ITERATIONS);
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
diff --git a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_accs.c 
b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_accs.c
index 78c06bd..0fc3baa 100644
--- a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_accs.c
+++ b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_accs.c
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = 0; j < SUB_YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(win_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = (1.0 + rank) + (1.0 + 
((rank+nranks-1)%nranks)) * (ITERATIONS);
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = 0; j < SUB_YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(win_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = 1.0 + rank;
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = SUB_YDIM; j < YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(win_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = 1.0 + rank;
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
diff --git a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c 
b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c
index 3570492..99ac294 100644
--- a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c
+++ b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = 0; j < SUB_YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(loc_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = (1.0 + peer);
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
@@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = 0; j < SUB_YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(loc_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = 1.0 + rank;
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = SUB_YDIM; j < YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(loc_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = 1.0 + rank;
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
diff --git a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_puts_gets.c 
b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_puts_gets.c
index d14988c..ea791dd 100644
--- a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_puts_gets.c
+++ b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_puts_gets.c
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = 0; j < SUB_YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(win_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = (1.0 + ((rank+nranks-1)%nranks));
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = 0; j < SUB_YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(win_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = 1.0 + rank;
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = SUB_YDIM; j < YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(win_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = 1.0 + rank;
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
diff --git a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_subarray_accs.c 
b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_subarray_accs.c
index 0eb5397..ddc4b4f 100644
--- a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_subarray_accs.c
+++ b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_subarray_accs.c
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = 0; j < SUB_YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(win_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = (1.0 + rank) + (1.0 + 
((rank+nranks-1)%nranks)) * (ITERATIONS);
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
@@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = 0; j < SUB_YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(win_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = 1.0 + rank;
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) {
       for (j = SUB_YDIM; j < YDIM; j++) {
         const double actual   = *(win_buf + i + j*XDIM);
         const double expected = 1.0 + rank;
-        if (actual - expected > 1e-10) {
+        if (fabs(actual - expected) > 1e-10) {
           printf("%d: Data validation failed at [%d, %d] expected=%f 
actual=%f\n",
               rank, j, i, expected, actual);
           errors++;
diff --git a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c 
b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c
index 99ac294..19c6158 100644
--- a/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c
+++ b/tests/mpi/test_mpi_indexed_gets.c
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 
 #define XDIM 8
 #define YDIM 1024
-#define SUB_XDIM 8
+#define SUB_XDIM 4
 #define SUB_YDIM 256
 
 int main(int argc, char **argv) {

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Source: armci-mpi
Source-Version: 0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1
Done: Drew Parsons <dpars...@debian.org>

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
armci-mpi, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 1068...@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Drew Parsons <dpars...@debian.org> (supplier of updated armci-mpi package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2024 12:46:00 +0200
Source: armci-mpi
Architecture: source
Version: 0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Science Maintainers 
<debian-science-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org>
Changed-By: Drew Parsons <dpars...@debian.org>
Closes: 1068100
Changes:
 armci-mpi (0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Team upload.
   * debian/tests: reinstate skipping mpich tests on 390x
   * apply Samuel Thibault's patch for 0.3.1~beta-7.1. Closes: #1068100.
   * debian/control: update Homepage to https://github.com/pmodels/armci-mpi
Checksums-Sha1:
 d93dc82b0ad768905c325aba4318184c259b1f24 2360 
armci-mpi_0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1.dsc
 2951ef0de50636d46334e66d7465514baa49fed6 8976 
armci-mpi_0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1.debian.tar.xz
 b675cf3fe3276f76b9986dbe9105688f2e331b48 10586 
armci-mpi_0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1_source.buildinfo
Checksums-Sha256:
 1d5f51b1732838b071263dbf38575c7cad9e0d571bfadf97bd126f0dc23f2465 2360 
armci-mpi_0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1.dsc
 ec31cf0b734f2b0b9b5e7b578286a299ec66fb79c46cc517c1984fc40a74a233 8976 
armci-mpi_0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1.debian.tar.xz
 8e14580c6b2b435bb9fc86404e828f413512d80ff1dbb6084a64b1d46dbefaaa 10586 
armci-mpi_0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1_source.buildinfo
Files:
 3de7b7d8c54d30e9c7cf7f614f2c5ba4 2360 science optional 
armci-mpi_0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1.dsc
 49070e1680c66cd6172f0d3977ad64af 8976 science optional 
armci-mpi_0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1.debian.tar.xz
 a625b874586cef231f189b43d61416fd 10586 science optional 
armci-mpi_0.3.1-beta+git20221202.f1c4dae-1_source.buildinfo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=1W6W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Attachment: pgpiVD0lH0dm6.pgp
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---

Reply via email to