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

Running code-format for simulation-upgrade #27137

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 10, 2019

Conversation

cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild cmsbuild commented Jun 7, 2019

Applying code-format for CMSSW category simulation,upgrade.
See the build logs here https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/GitHub-refactor-cmssw-module/380//console

cms-bot has successfully run the following:

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

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmsbuild commented Jun 7, 2019

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmsbuild commented Jun 7, 2019

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmsbuild commented Jun 7, 2019

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-27137/10274

  • This PR adds an extra 8KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmsbuild commented Jun 7, 2019

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/815/console Started: 2019/06/07 08:55

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmsbuild commented Jun 7, 2019

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

It involves the following packages:

SimTracker/SiPhase2Digitizer

@cmsbuild, @civanch, @kpedro88, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @ebrondol, @threus, @dgulhan 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
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmsbuild commented Jun 7, 2019

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmsbuild commented Jun 7, 2019

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

cmsbuild commented Jun 7, 2019

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-0ddecb/815/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: 3215458
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3215123
  • 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

Copy link
Contributor

@fabiocos fabiocos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@civanch @kpedro88 there are a few points where line splitting might be avoided by moving comments, and this may be handled in a separate PR. For the rest it looks ok to me, I will move forward with the integration. Please have a look at it anyway

pixdet,
bfield,
ionization_points,
collection_points); // transforms _ionization_points to collection_points
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed


// compute induced signal on readout elements and add to _signal
induce_signal(*it, simHitGlobalIndex, tofBin, pixdet, collection_points); // *ihit needed only for SimHit<-->Digi link
induce_signal(
*it, simHitGlobalIndex, tofBin, pixdet, collection_points); // *ihit needed only for SimHit<-->Digi link
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed

pixdet,
bfield,
ionization_points,
collection_points); // transforms _ionization_points to collection_points
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed


// compute induced signal on readout elements and add to _signal
induce_signal(*it, simHitGlobalIndex, tofBin, pixdet, collection_points); // *ihit needed only for SimHit<-->Digi link
induce_signal(
*it, simHitGlobalIndex, tofBin, pixdet, collection_points); // *ihit needed only for SimHit<-->Digi link
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed


DeadModules(use_deadmodule_DB_
? Parameters()
: conf_specific.getParameter<Parameters>("DeadModules")), // get dead module from cfg file
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed

const DetId& detId) const;

virtual void module_killing_conf(
uint32_t detID); // remove dead modules using the list in the configuration file PixelDigi_cfi.py
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed

pixdet,
bfield,
ionization_points,
collection_points); // transforms _ionization_points to collection_points
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed

// compute induced signal on readout elements and add to _signal
induce_signal(*it, simHitGlobalIndex, tofBin, pixdet, collection_points); // *ihit needed only for SimHit<-->Digi link
induce_signal(
*it, simHitGlobalIndex, tofBin, pixdet, collection_points); // *ihit needed only for SimHit<-->Digi link
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed

pixdet,
bfield,
ionization_points,
collection_points); // transforms _ionization_points to collection_points
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed


// compute induced signal on readout elements and add to _signal

induce_signal(*it, simHitGlobalIndex, tofBin, pixdet, collection_points); // *ihit needed only for SimHit<-->Digi link
induce_signal(
*it, simHitGlobalIndex, tofBin, pixdet, collection_points); // *ihit needed only for SimHit<-->Digi link
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fixed

@civanch
Copy link
Contributor

civanch commented Jun 10, 2019

@fabiocos , I have no problem with whatever code format is doing but this is a frequently used practice, when a comment is in the end of a line. In a small window such comment make a mess and hardly readable, I personally use to put a comment in the previous line. We may left this for developer allowing both ways of doing. Alternativly, can code format script do this automatically?

@civanch
Copy link
Contributor

civanch commented Jun 10, 2019

+1

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

+upgrade
@fabiocos I agree the lines you noted should be fixed later

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor Author

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)

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

@civanch there is obviously nothing wrong in having a comment at the end of the line, but if it is too long clang-format splits the line. In several other PRs we have preferred to restore a one line instruction by moving the comment to the line before. I have taken care of several other PRs in this sense, and I may do it also for this one. I am not sure about what is your alternative proposal...

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 4285098 into master Jun 10, 2019
@smuzaffar smuzaffar deleted the code-format-simulation-upgrade-b74f46 branch June 11, 2019 11:48
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

4 participants