Skip to content

Fix incorrect assertion in build_tracks kernel #1251

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
stephenswat wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
+7 −5
Open

Fix incorrect assertion in build_tracks kernel #1251

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
12 changes: 7 additions & 5 deletions device/common/include/traccc/finding/device/impl/build_tracks.ipp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -220,13 +220,15 @@ TRACCC_HOST_DEVICE inline void build_tracks(
#ifndef NDEBUG
// Assert that we did not make any duplicate track states.
for (const auto& i : track.constituent_links()) {
assert(i.type == edm::track_constituent_link::measurement);
if (run_mbf) {
assert(i.type == edm::track_constituent_link::track_state);
} else {
assert(i.type == edm::track_constituent_link::measurement);
}
for (const auto& j : track.constituent_links()) {
assert(j.type == edm::track_constituent_link::measurement);
if (i.index != j.index) {
// TODO: Re-enable me!
// assert(measurements.at(i->index).identifier() !=
// measurement.at(j->index).identifier());
assert(measurements.at(i.index).identifier() !=
measurements.at(j.index).identifier());
Comment on lines +230 to +231
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@krasznaa krasznaa Feb 9, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But if we use MBF, this could potentially lead to invalid memory access, no? 🤔

}
}
}
Expand Down
Loading