Skip to content

Conversation

@ranocha
Copy link
Member

@ranocha ranocha commented May 20, 2025

Let's see whether this influences the failing threaded CI tests

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Review checklist

This checklist is meant to assist creators of PRs (to let them know what reviewers will typically look for) and reviewers (to guide them in a structured review process). Items do not need to be checked explicitly for a PR to be eligible for merging.

Purpose and scope

  • The PR has a single goal that is clear from the PR title and/or description.
  • All code changes represent a single set of modifications that logically belong together.
  • No more than 500 lines of code are changed or there is no obvious way to split the PR into multiple PRs.

Code quality

  • The code can be understood easily.
  • Newly introduced names for variables etc. are self-descriptive and consistent with existing naming conventions.
  • There are no redundancies that can be removed by simple modularization/refactoring.
  • There are no leftover debug statements or commented code sections.
  • The code adheres to our conventions and style guide, and to the Julia guidelines.

Documentation

  • New functions and types are documented with a docstring or top-level comment.
  • Relevant publications are referenced in docstrings (see example for formatting).
  • Inline comments are used to document longer or unusual code sections.
  • Comments describe intent ("why?") and not just functionality ("what?").
  • If the PR introduces a significant change or new feature, it is documented in NEWS.md with its PR number.

Testing

  • The PR passes all tests.
  • New or modified lines of code are covered by tests.
  • New or modified tests run in less then 10 seconds.

Performance

  • There are no type instabilities or memory allocations in performance-critical parts.
  • If the PR intent is to improve performance, before/after time measurements are posted in the PR.

Verification

  • The correctness of the code was verified using appropriate tests.
  • If new equations/methods are added, a convergence test has been run and the results
    are posted in the PR.

Created with ❤️ by the Trixi.jl community.

@ranocha ranocha added testing parallelization Related to MPI, threading, tasks etc. upstream labels May 20, 2025
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 20, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.95%. Comparing base (c422240) to head (6fe36b4).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2408   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.95%   96.95%           
=======================================
  Files         504      504           
  Lines       41691    41721   +30     
=======================================
+ Hits        40418    40448   +30     
  Misses       1273     1273           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 96.95% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@ranocha
Copy link
Member Author

ranocha commented May 20, 2025

The remaining CI failures are again HTTP/2 429 errors:

and an error of the downgrade action:

ERROR: LoadError: range specifiers not supported
Stacktrace:
 [1] error(s::String)
   @ Base ./error.jl:35
 [2] downgrade(file::String, ignore_pkgs::Vector{SubString{String}}, strict::String)
   @ Main ~/work/_actions/julia-actions/julia-downgrade-compat/v1/downgrade.jl:26
 [3] top-level scope
   @ ~/work/_actions/julia-actions/julia-downgrade-compat/v1/downgrade.jl:77
in expression starting at /home/runner/work/_actions/julia-actions/julia-downgrade-compat/v1/downgrade.jl:71
Error: Process completed with exit code 1.

see https://github.com/trixi-framework/Trixi.jl/actions/runs/15129275219/job/42527002728?pr=2408#step:6:36

The only change of behavior in Polyester.jl comes from JuliaSIMD/Polyester.jl#154.
CC @efaulhaber

@ranocha ranocha marked this pull request as ready for review May 20, 2025 06:41
@ranocha ranocha added the bug Something isn't working label May 20, 2025
@ranocha
Copy link
Member Author

ranocha commented May 20, 2025

Just a few rate limit errors. Let's see whether CI passes when running the two failing jobs again.

However, the threaded CI jobs all pass 🥳 Thus, we have at least figured out what caused the errors - but fixing them may be tedious....
CC @efaulhaber

@ranocha
Copy link
Member Author

ranocha commented May 21, 2025

I will merge this right now without reviews to make CI work again. Please feel free to comment on it anyway.

@ranocha ranocha merged commit 4238b89 into main May 21, 2025
67 of 69 checks passed
@ranocha ranocha deleted the hr/check_polyester branch May 21, 2025 07:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bug Something isn't working parallelization Related to MPI, threading, tasks etc. testing upstream

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants