| Re: [eigen] 3.2-rc1 released! |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: eigen <eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [eigen] 3.2-rc1 released!
- From: Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:20:24 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=VnCL6RjslBccLCq3AHAf6kkIqHeNCxYE+PHrhcwcQ7s=; b=ycZSsOW7gkeRo5U8YcB75hDPolq+UlgjmSGTug5X8oiEUrZHfxxID52GOt8JtELuxC FZ/eeHmIS2McadGv6pJMKVW6FTesR2s94V76SSjhkBA6GQLEXRQuDpbH36/ADEAC9lgF MW8MfEFxeYIwX1aPIRj7mBgrGVWhbwguOy14Yw9eDWUtHf2tcSgHWzK3NVB8y5iuNLn+ ECOeBoc1Cj1JI2a7T6HLBoZMYSWjdaKjIL1PGY36Q7swjiX9jVeUl078JlmFydTLcl3j 3/qmp1BppFeQqf3danWudYweFGq1u10VCZ9eIEBolZmK2nBhZIhZp9ABs1Zh4L+cUOVy bVrw==
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:50 AM, Rhys Ulerich <rhys.ulerich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Eigen 3.2-rc1 has been released today (July 17, 2013).
>
> I ran 3.2-rc1 Nightly tests run atop an x86_64 GNU/Linux system with
> -DEIGEN_TEST_OPENMP=ON for gcc 4.5, gcc 4.6, gcc 4.7, intel 11.1,
> intel 12.1, and intel 13.1. All results are under machine
> setun.ices.utexas.edu on the dashboard at
> http://manao.inria.fr/CDash/index.php?project=Eigen&date=2013-07-17&display=project.
>
> On gcc 4.5 I see several test timings like
> 223/643 Test #223: product_trmm_11 .................. Passed 25.42 sec
> which look fishy to me. I am using -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RelWithDebInfo.
> Most tests are less than 2 seconds and many less than a 10th of a
> second. product_trmm_* and lu_7 seem to be among the outliers.
Yes observed that too, investigated a bit but I did not found anything
special. These TRMM tests are heavy because there are numerous
configuration that have to be tested and the matrices have to be
larger than the blocking sizes to make sure everything is well tested.
An idea would be to reduce these block-sizes for this test such that
we can reduce matrix sizes as well.
> On intel 11.1 there are some quite a few failed tests including a few
> internal icpc error lovelies. Is it possible to keep the 3.2 release
> from regressing any tests that had worked on 3.1?
Yes, we are aware of that ICE too. It's concerning an unsupported
unit-test, so not a blocker for me. We could try to bissect it to see
if there might be an easy fix though.
gael
> Hope that helps,
> Rhys
>
>