Change test pass condition for TestChoiceChi::test_goodness_of_fit #7626
Conversation
This file contains 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
TestChoiceChi::test_goodness_of_fit(https://github.com/cupy/cupy/blob/main/tests/cupy_tests/random_tests/test_generator.py#L830) is sensitive to data randomness and fails on ROCm with its current setup. The test generates random numbers using cupy random generator, which is seeded with random numbers from numpy.random(https://github.com/cupy/cupy/blob/main/cupy/testing/_random.py#L90).
The numpy.random is hardcoded to a seed of 100(https://github.com/cupy/cupy/blob/main/cupy/testing/_random.py#L37).
The test runs for 10 test cases following the seed, but one of them fails on ROCm, which is fine based on significance level used for the test(more details in #7544). This PR changes test passing condition to let it pass on ROCm as mentioned here - #7544 (comment).