Skip to content
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

tests: skip attention-related parameterize when attn_layer is 0 #3784

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 16, 2024

Conversation

njzjz
Copy link
Member

@njzjz njzjz commented May 15, 2024

The tests make no sense in this case.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Improved test coverage by adding an optional temperature parameter to the attention layer tests.

The tests makes no sense in this case.

Signed-off-by: Jinzhe Zeng <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented May 15, 2024

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The test_dpa1.py file has been updated to enhance its testing functionality by introducing an optional temperature parameter to the is_meaningless_zero_attention_layer_tests method. Additionally, the skip_pt, skip_dp, and skip_tf methods have been modified to incorporate this new parameter, ensuring more comprehensive and customizable testing scenarios.

Changes

File Change Summary
source/tests/consistent/descriptor/... Added an Optional[float] parameter temperature to is_meaningless_zero_attention_layer_tests.
source/tests/consistent/descriptor/... Updated skip_pt, skip_dp, and skip_tf methods to call is_meaningless_zero_attention_layer_tests with specific parameters.

Recent Review Details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2bf0769 and aeaeff2.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • source/tests/consistent/descriptor/test_dpa1.py (5 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (4)
source/tests/consistent/descriptor/test_dpa1.py (4)

111-118: The changes to the is_meaningless_zero_attention_layer_tests method look good. The logic correctly checks if the attn_layer is zero and any of the other conditions are true.


141-146: The changes to the skip_pt property look good. The method call to is_meaningless_zero_attention_layer_tests with the specific parameters is correctly implemented.


169-174: The changes to the skip_dp property look good. The method call to is_meaningless_zero_attention_layer_tests with the specific parameters is correctly implemented.


199-213: The changes to the skip_tf property look good. The method call to is_meaningless_zero_attention_layer_tests with the specific parameters is correctly implemented.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 15, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.49%. Comparing base (2bf0769) to head (aeaeff2).
Report is 142 commits behind head on devel.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            devel    #3784   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.49%   82.49%           
=======================================
  Files         515      515           
  Lines       48642    48642           
  Branches     2980     2980           
=======================================
  Hits        40126    40126           
  Misses       7605     7605           
  Partials      911      911           

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

@wanghan-iapcm wanghan-iapcm added this pull request to the merge queue May 16, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks May 16, 2024
@njzjz njzjz added this pull request to the merge queue May 16, 2024
Merged via the queue into deepmodeling:devel with commit d62a41f May 16, 2024
61 checks passed
@njzjz njzjz deleted the skip-atten0-tests branch May 16, 2024 19:40
mtaillefumier pushed a commit to mtaillefumier/deepmd-kit that referenced this pull request Sep 18, 2024
…modeling#3784)

The tests make no sense in this case.

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->

## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **Tests**
- Improved test coverage by adding an optional `temperature` parameter
to the attention layer tests.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

Signed-off-by: Jinzhe Zeng <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants