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

core: stdcm: stabilize running time computations #5386

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 19, 2023
Merged

Conversation

eckter
Copy link
Contributor

@eckter eckter commented Oct 18, 2023

The changes have been made on the same branch to stabilize everything until the fuzzer is stable. This ensures that we don't have partial fixes (see #5362) and we don't create new bugs with the fixes.

It now seems stable, I've run 2500 tests on a real infra and the only errors reported were unrelated to running time computations (I'll open issues for those).

Changes include:

  1. Envelopes can now have zero time delta (may happen in corner cases that are hard to get rid of), we still check that the positions are strictly increasing
  2. Align envelope slicing with part transitions when splitting an envelope into different stdcm edges
  3. Refine some epsilon tolerance, with a new utility function for comparaisons
  4. Remove capacity speed limit for STDCM standard allowance

Fixes #5329
Fixes #5372

@eckter eckter requested review from a team as code owners October 18, 2023 14:40
@eckter eckter marked this pull request as draft October 18, 2023 14:44
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 18, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #5386 (6d8817e) into dev (c0a0b02) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on dev.
The diff coverage is 55.00%.

❗ Current head 6d8817e differs from pull request most recent head aa7735b. Consider uploading reports for the commit aa7735b to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##                dev    #5386   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     18.73%   18.73%           
- Complexity     2309     2313    +4     
=========================================
  Files           849      849           
  Lines        102946   102954    +8     
  Branches       2398     2400    +2     
=========================================
+ Hits          19282    19287    +5     
- Misses        82325    82326    +1     
- Partials       1339     1341    +2     
Flag Coverage Δ
core 78.76% <55.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files Coverage Δ
.../sncf/osrd/stdcm/graph/STDCMStandardAllowance.java 71.42% <ø> (ø)
.../java/fr/sncf/osrd/envelope/part/EnvelopePart.java 81.03% <0.00%> (+0.52%) ⬆️
...sncf/osrd/envelope_sim/TrainPhysicsIntegrator.java 90.32% <50.00%> (-1.35%) ⬇️
...pe_sim/allowances/AbstractAllowanceWithRanges.java 89.82% <0.00%> (ø)
...osrd/envelope_sim/pipelines/MaxEffortEnvelope.java 90.56% <33.33%> (-3.56%) ⬇️
...ava/fr/sncf/osrd/stdcm/graph/AllowanceManager.java 90.69% <75.00%> (-1.62%) ⬇️

We often need an epsilon-length step in positions,
but the values in time deltas are much smaller
than the position deltas, so we often have zeros
there. The constraint has been moved to positions
to avoid "empty" steps.
Copy link
Contributor

@axrolld axrolld left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@eckter eckter marked this pull request as ready for review October 19, 2023 08:47
@eckter eckter enabled auto-merge October 19, 2023 08:58
@eckter eckter added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 19, 2023
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Oct 19, 2023
@eckter eckter added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 19, 2023
Merged via the queue into dev with commit b0d6118 Oct 19, 2023
2 checks passed
@eckter eckter deleted the ech/stdcm-bugfixes branch October 19, 2023 09:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
4 participants