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

Stateless clusterizer for SiStrip #12307

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Nov 12, 2015

Conversation

VinInn
Copy link
Contributor

@VinInn VinInn commented Nov 7, 2015

make SiStrip clusterizer stateless to support multi-thread on demand.
This is required before making the container itself Thread Safe.
Purely technical changes, tested extensively long ago.
Results should be bit-identical to previous version

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 7, 2015

A new Pull Request was created by @VinInn (Vincenzo Innocente) for CMSSW_8_0_X.

Stateless clusterizer for SiStrip

It involves the following packages:

RecoLocalTracker/SiStripClusterizer

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @forthommel, @yduhm, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @gbenelli, @rovere, @VinInn, @nickmccoll, @jlagram, @gpetruc, @cerati, @threus this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' or '@cmsbuild, please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Nov 7, 2015

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 7, 2015

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/9508/console

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 7, 2015

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 7, 2015

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented Nov 7, 2015

something went wrong in the merge...
will have to check in more details the HLT workflow...

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented Nov 8, 2015

tested (with debug on) for step2 of 134.91
identical output to original

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented Nov 8, 2015

@cmsbuild please test

1 similar comment
@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Nov 8, 2015

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 8, 2015

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/9512/console

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 8, 2015

Pull request #12307 was updated. @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

float noise(const uint16_t& strip) const { return SiStripNoises::getNoise( strip, noiseRange ); }
float gain(const uint16_t& strip) const { return SiStripGain::getStripGain( strip, gainRange ); }
bool bad(const uint16_t& strip) const { return qualityHandle->IsStripBad( qualityRange, strip ); }
// uint32_t currentId() const {return detId;}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this can be removed, unless needed for some imminent developments

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for noticing.
I will remove it next round (when integrating ThreadSafe DetSetVector)

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Nov 9, 2015

I will delay signoff until the changes from #12161 make it through or a 80X PR equivalent of #12161 appears.

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented Nov 10, 2015

I disagree.
Please integrate this one.
We will deal with #12161 later on
@boudoul please give your opinion
(btw Gaelle should be added to LocalReco, Calib etc (as TRK-DPG coord), Gabriele removed...)

I need this to continue making HLT thread safe.
FYI @fwyzard , @Dr15Jones
Next PR is ready...

float gain(const uint16_t& strip) const { return SiStripGain::getStripGain( strip, gainRange ); }
bool bad(const uint16_t& strip) const { return qualityHandle->IsStripBad( qualityRange, strip ); }
// uint32_t currentId() const {return detId;}
Det setDetId(const uint32_t) const;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe findDetId might be a less confusing name? A const set function usually sets off my warning bells. In this case nothing is actually set.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

not anymore at least!
thanks for all other suggestions as well.

@Dr15Jones
Copy link
Contributor

Based on my cursory overview, it seems pretty good to me beyond the few comments I had.

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

@slava77 - given the state of the strip unpacker PR, I think we can move ahead with this and eventually put the unpacker in 80x once its fully checked out for HI (and for old data)

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Nov 11, 2015

There are several comments from Chris which need a follow up (or a notice that they will be fixed in the next PR as happened to my comments).

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented Nov 11, 2015

I think that @Dr15Jones will be satisfied that his comments get adressed in the next PR that will also
include the Concurrent version of the DetSetVector

@Dr15Jones
Copy link
Contributor

fine with me

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Nov 11, 2015

+1

for #12307 d9629b4

  • changes in the code are in line with the description; updates from the code review are expected in the upcoming PR
  • jenkins tests pass and comparisons with the baseline show no difference
  • local test on top of CMSSW_8_0_0_pre1 using run2 134.802 show no substantive difference in memory or CPU timing utilization

@boudoul @forthommel please note this PR with changes overlapping with the strip unpacker updates: some extra care may be needed to merge the strip unpacker updates into 80X, it's better to have a separate PR for that, once the issues with the unpacker DQM are sorted out.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_8_0_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

+1

cmsbuild added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 12, 2015
@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 877f2dd into cms-sw:CMSSW_8_0_X Nov 12, 2015
forthommel added a commit to forthommel/cmssw that referenced this pull request Nov 12, 2015
slava77 pushed a commit to slava77/cmssw that referenced this pull request Nov 15, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants