-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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
fix Radix Sort for size = N*256+1 #38599
Conversation
@AdrianoDee @cericeci FYI |
test parameters:
|
please test |
Thanks Vincenzo |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-38599/30870
|
A new Pull Request was created by @VinInn (Vincenzo Innocente) for master. It involves the following packages:
@makortel, @fwyzard can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-61e992/25984/summary.html GPU Comparison SummarySummary:
Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+heterogeneous Sorry for the delay, I missed it while I was away. |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
type bugfix |
+1 |
As the title says.
purely technical.
no regression expected as used in production only for vertex sorting that never exceeds 100 or so.
thanks @cericeci for pointing out the failure and provide a test