test(tensilelite): cover report=False on the later XCC reject paths - #10267
Open
tony-davis wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
test(tensilelite): cover report=False on the later XCC reject paths#10267tony-davis wants to merge 1 commit into
tony-davis wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
PR #9355 added `if report:` guards to the not-power-of-two, does-not-divide and exception branches of _validateWorkGroupMappingXCC. Only the non-positive branch had a report=False test, so the false arc of the other three guards (91->93, 96->98, 102->104) went uncovered and ValidWorkGroupMappingXCC.py dropped from 100.00% to 95.59%. The per-file coverage ratchet added by #9123 merged 18 minutes after #9355 with a baseline captured before those lines existed, so the gate now fails on every hipBLASlt PR against a file it did not touch. Pin the suppression per branch rather than lowering the baseline. Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
github-actions
Bot
added
project: hipblaslt
project: hipsparselt
ci:hipsparselt-fast
labels
✅ All Checks Passed — Ready for Review
📖 Need help? See the Policy FAQ for details on every check and how to fix failures. |
|
🎉 All checks passed! This PR is ready for review. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds characterization test coverage to exercise the report=False suppression contract for the later reject branches in TensileLogic.ValidWorkGroupMappingXCC, restoring per-file branch coverage to match the existing ratcheted baseline without changing production code.
Changes:
- Add a parametrized test that hits the not-power-of-two, CU-divisibility, and exception paths with
report=False. - Assert each path returns
False, produces no stdout output, and does not mutate_xcc_failures_by_file.
tony-davis
enabled auto-merge (squash)
August 1, 2026 02:01
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. ❌ Your project check has failed because the head coverage (76.92%) is below the target coverage (80.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #10267 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 69.62% 69.62%
========================================
Files 2741 2741
Lines 451544 451545 +1
Branches 66531 66531
========================================
+ Hits 314370 314374 +4
Misses 116966 116966
+ Partials 20208 20205 -3
*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
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
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.
The per-file coverage ratchet is failing on every hipBLASlt PR with
ValidWorkGroupMappingXCC.pyat 95.59% against a 100.00% baseline, on a file those PRs do not touch. This restores the coverage rather than lowering the baseline.Two changes landed on develop eighteen minutes apart on 2026-07-31. #9355 (18:46Z) added
reportguards to three reject branches of_validateWorkGroupMappingXCC. #9123 (19:04Z) introducedcoverage-baseline.json, recording that file at 100.00% from a snapshot taken before those lines existed. The baseline was stale on arrival.The gap is three partial branches and zero missed statements: the
if report:false arc at lines 91, 96 and 102, covering the not-power-of-two, does-not-divide, and exception paths. The existingtest_report_false_is_side_effect_freeonly reaches the non-positive branch at line 86. Each guard is separate, so the suppression contract needs pinning per branch.Test plan
The new parametrized test asserts each path returns False, prints nothing, and leaves
_xcc_failures_by_fileempty. Verified out of band that all three cases also print underreport=True, so the parameters reach the intended branches instead of exiting early, and that branch coverage marks arcs91->93,96->98and102->104covered. No production code changes.I used plain assertions instead of
snapshothere; the property is fully expressible inline and it avoids regenerating__snapshots__for a gate fix.