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
Sensitive detectors 6 and watchers cleanup #23595
Conversation
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
PR is not yet fully completed but the test will be started in order to see is something is forgotten. |
please test |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-23595/5197 |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
A new Pull Request was created by @civanch (Vladimir Ivantchenko) for master. It involves the following packages: SimG4CMS/Calo @cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
Have the watchers been made thread safe? Or is the point to be able to run those which are thread safe, and leave the thread-safeness of watchers as the problem of the one who wants to run them? |
@makortel , we have discussed at SIM meeting mainly with Sunanda, that we will update all watchers to be thread safe. A good part of old watchers are not revocable for MT but not all of them are used now, I have in mind removing them. We need removing the protection because in exotica sector there is a use case where watcher is needed for this production. First we restore exotica case, then will recover other useful watchers. |
-1 Tested at: 9dc586d You can see the results of the tests here: I found follow errors while testing this PR Failed tests: Build
I found an error when building: >> Entering Package SimG4Core/Application Entering library rule at SimG4Core/Application >> Compiling /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_2_X_2018-06-15-1100/src/SimG4Core/Application/src/SteppingAction.cc In file included from /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_2_X_2018-06-15-1100/src/SimG4Core/Application/interface/EventAction.h:6:0, from /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_2_X_2018-06-15-1100/src/SimG4Core/Application/src/SteppingAction.cc:3: /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_2_X_2018-06-15-1100/poison/SimG4Core/Application/interface/G4SimEvent.h:1:2: error: #error THIS FILE HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PACKAGE. #error THIS FILE HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PACKAGE. ^~~~~ >> Compiling /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_2_X_2018-06-15-1100/src/SimG4Core/Application/src/ExceptionHandler.cc In file included from /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_2_X_2018-06-15-1100/src/SimG4Core/Application/interface/EventAction.h:6:0, from /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_2_X_2018-06-15-1100/src/SimG4Core/Application/src/SteppingAction.cc:3: |
Comparison not run due to Build errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped) |
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
please test |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-23595/5215 |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
Pull request #23595 was updated. @cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth can you please check and sign again. |
Comparison job queued. |
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 will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
|
||
// define real distances: | ||
float d = fabs(tan(th)-tan(thFibDirRad)); | ||
float d = std::abs(tan(th)-tan(thFibDirRad)); |
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.
sorry, when is this next iteration planned? Not for 10_2_X I assume at this point
double hadr; //EnergyDeposit of HD particles | ||
double theIncidentEnergy; //Energy of the primary particle | ||
G4int theTrackID; //Identification number of the primary | ||
float elem; //EnergyDeposit of EM particles |
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.
is the move from double to float in this class supposed to leave the result unchanged? A priori I would imagine no. This class is used in the BHM and in the FastTimer/MTD sensitive detectors. The latter are PhaseII detectors for which I doubt we have histograms that could spot differences. Not a big dal but...
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.
@fabiocos , in the SD classes these values are float or int, so the same type should be members of this hit.
+1 |
This PR includes pure technical clean-up of SIM packages:
Correctness of this PR means no difference versus baseline.