Skip to content

Further CPUFJ assert and numerical fixes#466

Merged
rapids-bot[bot] merged 3 commits intobranch-25.10from
cpufj-sanitycheck-fix
Oct 8, 2025
Merged

Further CPUFJ assert and numerical fixes#466
rapids-bot[bot] merged 3 commits intobranch-25.10from
cpufj-sanitycheck-fix

Conversation

@aliceb-nv
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This PR fixes an inconsistent calculation for an assert() test causing it to be triggered due to numerical issues. Additional improvements to prevent runoff are also included

@aliceb-nv aliceb-nv added this to the 25.10 milestone Oct 8, 2025
@aliceb-nv aliceb-nv added the bug Something isn't working label Oct 8, 2025
@aliceb-nv aliceb-nv requested a review from a team as a code owner October 8, 2025 12:12
@aliceb-nv aliceb-nv added the non-breaking Introduces a non-breaking change label Oct 8, 2025
@aliceb-nv aliceb-nv requested review from Kh4ster and rg20 October 8, 2025 12:12
@aliceb-nv
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/merge

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit 0f62bba into branch-25.10 Oct 8, 2025
90 checks passed
@rgsl888prabhu rgsl888prabhu deleted the cpufj-sanitycheck-fix branch October 29, 2025 16:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bug Something isn't working non-breaking Introduces a non-breaking change

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants