[Insight-developers] itkImageFillBufferTest4.1 : Failed Tests

[Luis Ibanez]

  Oh man, that's quite embarrassing !!     :-)

That's what I get for copy-pasting the ctest from
one machine to create the ones for another.
(Bad Luis).


I just fixed both scripts in thurmite.kitware
to use 4Gb instead of 24Gb.


Gaetan: My apologies for the noise.


     Luis


----------------------------------------------
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Bradley Lowekamp
<blowekamp at mail.nih.gov> wrote:
> Luis,
> I looked at this failing test the other day. Should a 32-bit system really
> set "ITK_COMPUTER_MEMORY_SIZE:STRING=24"? This may be misleading when
> restricting tests which require a lot of memory.
> However, I do think ITK should have some defined behavior when an image is
> not successfully allocated (segfaulting is not good ), and check for
> overflow of SizeX*SizeY*SizeZ.... I think some body did something about this
> then it got commented out....
> Brad
> On Dec 20, 2010, at 2:51 PM, Luis Ibanez wrote:
>
> Hi Gaetan,
>
> The test:
>
> http://www.cdash.org/CDash/testSummary.php?project=2&name=itkImageFillBufferTest4.1&date=2010-12-20
>
> is failing in thurmite.kitware (a mac mini).
>
> The tests segfaults in line 79 of
>
> ./Testing/Code/Common/itkImageFillBufferTest.cxx
>
>
> Looking at the code of this test:
>
> ab29b81a (Gaëtan Lehmann 2009-08-14 07:40:38 -0400 77)   std::cout <<
> "ComputeOffset(): " << image->ComputeOffset(idx) << std::endl;
> ab29b81a (Gaëtan Lehmann 2009-08-14 07:40:38 -0400 78)   // we may
> have a segfault here on 32 bit systems if 4 GB is requested and 0
> effectively allocated
> ab29b81a (Gaëtan Lehmann 2009-08-14 07:40:38 -0400 79)   if(
> image->GetPixel( idx ) != 128 )
> ab29b81a (Gaëtan Lehmann 2009-08-14 07:40:38 -0400 80)     {
> d4917a66 (Gaëtan Lehmann 2009-08-15 04:03:36 -0400 81)     std::cerr
> << "Value is not 128!" << std::endl;
> b738d019 (Luis Ibanez    2010-10-25 12:16:00 -0400 82)     return
> (EXIT_FAILURE);
> ab29b81a (Gaëtan Lehmann 2009-08-14 07:40:38 -0400 83)     }
> ab29b81a (Gaëtan Lehmann 2009-08-14 07:40:38 -0400 84)
> ab29b81a (Gaëtan Lehmann 2009-08-14 07:40:38 -0400 85)   return
> (EXIT_SUCCESS);
>
>
>
> It looks like somehow
> this segfault is expected in some systems.
>
> Any suggestion on how we could exclude this tests
> from running in the systems where it is expected
> to seg fault ?
>
>
>    Thanks
>
>
>          Luis
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
> http://kitware.com/products/protraining.html
>
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>
> ========================================================
>
> Bradley Lowekamp
>
> Lockheed Martin Contractor for
>
> Office of High Performance Computing and Communications
>
> National Library of Medicine
>
> blowekamp at mail.nih.gov
>
>