Update HGCal unit test to run with flat phase 2 tracker

[lgray]

As in title, it works again!

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @lgray (Lindsey Gray) for CMSSW_8_1_X.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/StandardSequences
RecoLocalCalo/HGCalRecProducers

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @franzoni, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @cseez, @vandreev11, @sethzenz, @makortel, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @pfs, @cerati, @dgulhan, @kpedro88 this is something you requested to watch as well.
@slava77, @Degano, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are list here #13028

[lgray]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/12552/console

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: ef9010d
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-14180/12552/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-14180/12552/summary.html

[slava77]

it's odd that the global era setup should be modified to get a unit test to work.
can this be something less invasive?
Say, add a Phase2_pixelLegacy

[slava77]

@lgray
@davidlange6
Does it make sense to edit here?

[lgray]

I put this there originally because no one had told me how the phase 2 tracker customization worked.
Now that I know how that's handled the phase1 stuff is no longer needed in general, not just for this unit test.

[lgray]

@slava77 Another way to fix this is to decommission this unit test and put HGCal tests into runTheMatrix or the addOn tests.

[slava77]

@lgray
I missed the context of phase1Pixel and trackingPhase1 added (in part also that it was added by you in part for this test to run). Thanks for pointing this out.
I'm not sure what's the best at this point: maybe phase1Pixel is still meaningful, but then trackingPhase1 doesn't make sense. So, removal should be OK.

@boudoul @makortel @ebrondol please confirm that

self.Phase2 = cms.ModifierChain( self.phase2_common, self.phase2_tracker, self.phase2_hgcal, self.phase2_muon )

is what's expected from tracker/tracking perspective

[davidlange6]

how about

runTheMatrix.py -l 11024

On Apr 26, 2016, at 3:41 PM, Lindsey Gray notifications@github.com wrote:

In Configuration/StandardSequences/python/Eras.py:

@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ def init(self):
# Scenarios further afield.
# Phase2 is everything for the 2023 (2026?) detector that works so far in this release.
# include phase 1 stuff until phase 2 tracking is fully defined....

•    self.Phase2 = cms.ModifierChain( self.phase1Pixel, self.trackingPhase1, self.phase2_common, self.phase2_tracker, self.phase2_hgcal, self.phase2_muon )
  

•    self.Phase2 = cms.ModifierChain( self.phase2_common, self.phase2_tracker, self.phase2_hgcal, self.phase2_muon )
  

@slava77 Another way to fix this is to decommission this unit test and put HGCal tests into runTheMatrix or the addOn tests.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub

[slava77]

It just tells that I know next to nothing about configuration of phase2_tracker.
Does the phase2TkFlat include the inner pixel tracker or is it just the outer phase2 tracker with the flat PS/2S module layout?

[kpedro88]

I believe phase2TkFlat and phase2TkTilted include all the customizations necessary for each version of the Phase2 tracker. The Phase1 customizations should not be necessary. @boudoul, can you confirm?

[ebrondol]

Hi, I can confirm that both cfg contain pixel and OT. The Phase1*.py are sometime useful to run the iterative tracking. I will get rid of them as soon as we will move phase2 to era (as mentioned also in PR#14240).

[slava77]

+1

for #14180 ef9010d

• cleanup in Phase2 era to no contain phase1 pixel or tracker modifiers (full modifications are to be defined in phase2_tracker modifier and are now defined in customization functions)
• jenkins tests pass (including unit test for HGCAL); there are no changes in workflows tested in jenkins
• runTheMatrix.py -l 11024 Phase2 local reco runs both in baseline and with this PR

[davidlange6]

+1
ok - but is there something in this hard to maintain unit test that is not tested in runTheMatrix already at this point?

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_8_1_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will be automatically merged.