Extended test on Geant4 geometry #27592
Conversation
|
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-27592/11017
Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)
|
|
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-27592/11018
|
|
A new Pull Request was created by @civanch (Vladimir Ivantchenko) for master. It involves the following packages: SimG4Core/Application @cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
please test |
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
-1 Tested at: 53fbbfe You can see the results of the tests here: I found follow errors while testing this PR Failed tests: Build HeaderConsistency
I found compilation error when building: Entering library rule at src/SimG4Core/Application/plugins
>> Compiling edm plugin /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_0_X_2019-07-23-2300/src/SimG4Core/Application/plugins/OscarMTProducer.cc
>> Compiling edm plugin /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_0_X_2019-07-23-2300/src/SimG4Core/Application/plugins/OscarProducer.cc
In file included from /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_0_X_2019-07-23-2300/src/SimG4Core/Application/interface/OscarProducer.h:12:0,
from /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_0_X_2019-07-23-2300/src/SimG4Core/Application/plugins/OscarProducer.cc:7:
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_0_X_2019-07-23-2300/poison/SimG4Core/Application/interface/CustomUIsession.h:1:2: error: #error THIS FILE HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PACKAGE.
#error THIS FILE HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PACKAGE.
^~~~~
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_0_X_2019-07-23-2300/src/SimG4Core/Application/plugins/OscarProducer.cc: In constructor 'OscarProducer::OscarProducer(const edm::ParameterSet&)':
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_0_X_2019-07-23-2300/src/SimG4Core/Application/plugins/OscarProducer.cc:136:41: error: invalid use of incomplete type 'class CustomUIsession'
m_UIsession.reset(new CustomUIsession());
|
|
Comparison not run due to Build errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped) |
cmsbuild
added
comparison-notrun
tests-rejected
and removed
comparison-pending
tests-started
labels
|
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-27592/11028
|
|
Pull request #27592 was updated. @cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth can you please check and sign again. |
|
please test |
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
Comparison job queued. |
|
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
|
+1 |
cmsbuild
added
fully-signed
simulation-approved
and removed
pending-signatures
simulation-pending
labels
|
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) |
| @@ -52,12 +52,20 @@ | |||
| PhysicsTablesDirectory = cms.string('PhysicsTables'), | |||
| StorePhysicsTables = cms.bool(False), | |||
| RestorePhysicsTables = cms.bool(False), | |||
| CheckOverlap = cms.untracked.bool(False), | |||
| CheckGeometry = cms.bool(False), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@civanch why this and other verbosity flags are moved from untracked to tracked? What is the rationale behind it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@fabiocos, "verbosity" parameters were added by different peoples and historically some are tracked, another untracked. The way how these parameters are used is well defined: only for debuging. They mainly are inside this base python file. Likely some may be removed, another may stay "tracked".
| @@ -81,7 +89,7 @@ | |||
| ), | |||
| MagneticField = cms.PSet( | |||
| UseLocalMagFieldManager = cms.bool(False), | |||
| Verbosity = cms.untracked.bool(False), | |||
| Verbosity = cms.bool(False), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@civanch similar question here for instance
| @@ -118,7 +126,7 @@ | |||
| type = cms.string('SimG4Core/Physics/FTFP_BERT_EMM'), | |||
| DummyEMPhysics = cms.bool(False), | |||
| CutsPerRegion = cms.bool(True), | |||
| CutsOnProton = cms.untracked.bool(True), | |||
| CutsOnProton = cms.bool(True), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@civanch this I understand more
|
@civanch if I want to recursively navigate into the volume hierarchy as before which settings should I provide now? |
|
@fabiocos, in this test we may call Geant4 facility to check overlaps starting from some physical volume, it will go via full depth but due to migration to VecGeom this become extremely slow. With native Geant4 geometry this check takes ~20 minutes for full CMS and > 1 day for VecGeom. The possibility to limit depth allowing fast check on volume of interest. If depth=-1 full check will be applied. In parallel here we have a possibility to make our own printout of physical and/or logical volumes, we define how deep we want to go. I need consult with Geant4 geometry experts if Geant4 internal facility still exist but experts are at vacations. |
|
@civanch ok, I see that with Depth set to -1 I may recover for instance a full scan of the FastTimerRegion. Of course it isn't fast, but it depends on what we need to check. |
|
+1 |
PR description:
Extended test on Geant4 geometry is added, it is expected , that the test will help in Phase2 development and for DD4Hep migration. As a result of test few files are created with dumps of information:
Some classes are moved from SimG4Core/Application to SimG4Core/Geometry in order to have a correct dependecy between sub-libraries. Some files are renamed to avoid classes started from "G4".
Mainstream simulation should not be affected.
PR validation:
private