Skip to content

Conversation

townwish4git
Copy link
Contributor

@townwish4git townwish4git commented Oct 11, 2025

What does this PR do?

Increase the OLMo models test error passing threshold for BF16 to avoid unnecessary test failures for valid results.

refer to: #1357

Before submitting

  • This PR fixes a typo or improves the docs (you can dismiss the other checks if that's the case).
  • Did you read the contributor guideline?
  • Did you make sure to update the documentation with your changes? E.g. record bug fixes or new features in What's New. Here are the
    documentation guidelines
  • Did you build and run the code without any errors?
  • Did you report the running environment (NPU type/MS version) and performance in the doc? (better record it for data loading, model inference, or training tasks)
  • Did you write any new necessary tests?

Who can review?

Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed. Feel free to tag
members/contributors who may be interested in your PR.

@xxx

@townwish4git townwish4git requested a review from vigo999 as a code owner October 11, 2025 02:21
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @townwish4git, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses an issue with test stability for OLMo models when operating in BF16 precision. By adjusting the error tolerance, the change ensures that tests accurately reflect valid model behavior, thereby reducing spurious failures and improving the overall reliability of the testing suite for these specific model configurations.

Highlights

  • BF16 Test Threshold Adjustment: Increased the error passing threshold for BF16 precision in OLMo model tests from "5e-3" to "1e-2". This change aims to prevent unnecessary test failures for valid results, as noted in the PR description and linked issue.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request increases the error threshold for bf16 data type in the OLMo and OLMo2 model tests to prevent flaky test failures. The change is straightforward and justified. I've added comments regarding code duplication of the threshold constants, suggesting a refactor to improve maintainability.

from tests.transformers_tests.models.modeling_common import ids_numpy

DTYPE_AND_THRESHOLDS = {"fp32": 5e-4, "fp16": 5e-3, "bf16": 5e-3}
DTYPE_AND_THRESHOLDS = {"fp32": 5e-4, "fp16": 5e-3, "bf16": 1e-2}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

medium

This DTYPE_AND_THRESHOLDS constant is also defined in tests/transformers_tests/models/olmo2/test_modeling_omo2.py. To improve maintainability and prevent potential inconsistencies, consider moving this constant to a shared module like tests/transformers_tests/models/modeling_common.py and importing it in both test files.

from tests.transformers_tests.models.modeling_common import ids_numpy

DTYPE_AND_THRESHOLDS = {"fp32": 5e-4, "fp16": 5e-3, "bf16": 5e-3}
DTYPE_AND_THRESHOLDS = {"fp32": 5e-4, "fp16": 5e-3, "bf16": 1e-2}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

medium

This DTYPE_AND_THRESHOLDS constant is also defined in tests/transformers_tests/models/olmo/test_modeling_olmo.py. To improve maintainability and prevent potential inconsistencies, consider moving this constant to a shared module like tests/transformers_tests/models/modeling_common.py and importing it in both test files.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants