Running code-format for l1

[cmsbuild]

Applying code-format for CMSSW category l1.
See the build logs here https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/GitHub-refactor-cmssw-module/277//console

cms-bot has successfully run the following:

• scram build code-checks-all
• scram build code-format-all
• scram build

[cmsbuild]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-26951/10000

• This PR adds an extra 8KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/528/console Started: 2019/05/27 06:43

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @cmsbuild for master.

It involves the following packages:

L1Trigger/CSCTrackFinder
L1Trigger/DTBti
L1Trigger/DTTriggerServerTheta
L1Trigger/L1TNtuples
L1Trigger/RPCTrigger

@cmsbuild, @rekovic can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald, @kreczko, @thomreis this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 63f40ab
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9d1885/528/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9d1885/528/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 33
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3209232
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3208897
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 334
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 32 files compared)
• Checked 137 log files, 14 edm output root files, 33 DQM output files

[fabiocos]

@rekovic from a quick look everything looks ok to me, please cross check. I see a number of numerical tables that are now presented in a way that may be is not the desired one, although technically correct. I wonder whether these lists would not be more suitable for external data files.

[fabiocos]

+1

[fabiocos]

merge