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
Phase2-hgx85 Correct for overwriting (as reported in PR #19179) #19198
Conversation
A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda for master. It involves the following packages: RecoLocalCalo/HGCalRecAlgos @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @slava77, @kpedro88, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
@cmsbuild Please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
Comparison job queued. |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
+1 |
@bsunanda can you make a backport of this fix for 91X? |
// last layer per subdetector | ||
static const unsigned int lastLayerEE = 28; | ||
static const unsigned int lastLayerFH = 40; | ||
// maximum number of wafers per Layer: 666 (V7), 794 (V8) | ||
static const unsigned int maxNumberOfWafersPerLayer = 794; | ||
static const unsigned int maxNumberOfWafersPerLayer = 796; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please update the text in the comments above: it still says 794. If instead this 796 corresponds to 794 precisely, please add a few words why.
thresholds[layer-1][wafer]=sigmaNoise*ecut; | ||
v_sigmaNoise[layer-1][wafer] = sigmaNoise; | ||
thresholds[layer-1].at(wafer)=sigmaNoise*ecut; | ||
v_sigmaNoise[layer-1].at(wafer) = sigmaNoise; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
now that the problem was fixed, please change back to the faster "[]" version
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if protection is really needed for out-of bound reads, please add an assert(wafer < maxNumberOfWafersPerLayer)
on L558.
@cmsbuild Please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
Comparison job queued. |
+1 |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
+1
|
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @smuzaffar |
+1 |
Phase2-hgx86 Fix the bug for overwriting (backport from 9_2_X #19198)
Use correct # for maximum wafers. Working on getting some of the magic #'s from geometry & topology/