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
Use TransitionInfo in more interfaces (more) #31584
Conversation
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-31584/18635
|
A new Pull Request was created by @wddgit (W. David Dagenhart) for master. It involves the following packages: FWCore/Framework @makortel, @smuzaffar, @cmsbuild, @Dr15Jones can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
|
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.
Looks good, thanks. I had a few minor comments.
@@ -141,13 +142,14 @@ namespace edm { | |||
} | |||
} | |||
|
|||
void doBeginRun(RunPrincipal const& rp, EventSetupImpl const& ci, ModuleCallingContext const* mcc) final { | |||
void doBeginRun(RunTransitionInfo const& info, ModuleCallingContext const* mcc) final { | |||
RunPrincipal const& rp = info.principal(); |
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.
How about moving this inside the if constexpr
? (there are many similar cases below, I won't repeat the comment) I'd expect the compiler to optimize it away in case the condition is false, but I think it would be tiny bit clearer as well.
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.
Done. That is better. Thanks. I also did the same thing in the other 7 places this occurs.
ModuleCallingContext const* mcc) { | ||
LuminosityBlockPrincipal const& lbp = info.principal(); |
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.
I suppose this line could be omitted and two lines below the LuminosityBlock
constructed as
LuminosityBlock lb(info, moduleDescription_, mcc, true);
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.
Done. Thanks.
ModuleCallingContext const* mcc) { | ||
RunPrincipal const& rp = info.principal(); |
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.
I suppose this line could be omitted, and two lines below the Run
be constructed with
Run r(info, moduleDescription_, mcc, true);
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.
Done. Thanks. (I'll push the new commit in a few minutes)
+1 |
Comparison job queued. |
abort test |
Jenkins tests are aborted. |
6ca1bcd
to
1ef5e55
Compare
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-31584/18683
|
Pull request #31584 was updated. @makortel, @smuzaffar, @cmsbuild, @Dr15Jones can you please check and sign again. |
please test All comments should be resolved now. |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
|
+1 |
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. @silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description:
Use the TransitionInfo classes in more interfaces in the Framework. This is the last in a series of pull requests simplifying some interfaces internal to the Framework with the TransitionInfo class. The main goal is to make the code more readable and understandable. It shouldn't affect output or performance. This one is focused on the interfaces from the Worker down into the module base classes.
I am not aware of anything controversial in the one.
PR validation:
There should be no change in behavior or output. This relies on existing tests.