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

drop type specs in RecoTauTag #31748

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Oct 12, 2020
Merged

drop type specs in RecoTauTag #31748

merged 2 commits into from Oct 12, 2020

Conversation

jeongeun
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

Update the safer syntax for existing parameter :

  • drop type specifications where the original parameter exists.
  • move all parameter inside the clone

Instead of modifying parameters with full type specs, which can be interpreted as an insertion of a new parameter, it is a safer way to protect from parameter name mistakes and will also help in possible parameter migrations.
(The previous PR were PR#31162,PR#31243,PR#31332, PR#31389, PR#31523, PR#31538)

In this PR, total 17 files changed.

  • RecoTauTag/Configuration : 4 files
  • RecoTauTag/HLTProducers : 2 files
  • RecoTauTag/RecoTau : 11 files

PR validation:

Event Content comparison check was also done and there is no change with these updates.
Tested in CMSSW_11_2_X, the basic test all passed in the CMSSW PR instructions.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-31748/18963

  • This PR adds an extra 28KB to repository

  • There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @jeongeun (JeongEun Lee) for master.

It involves the following packages:

RecoTauTag/Configuration
RecoTauTag/HLTProducers
RecoTauTag/RecoTau

@perrotta, @Martin-Grunewald, @slava77, @cmsbuild, @fwyzard, @jpata can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@riga this is something you requested to watch as well.
@silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 11, 2020

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1
Tested at: 5620af1
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d8154e/9863/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-10-11-0000
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@@ -423,11 +423,11 @@
verbosity = 0
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

at line 422 there is also a forgotten

    inputIDNameSuffix = cms.string("dR03"),

@@ -23,11 +22,11 @@
ca8PFJetsCHSprunedForBoostedTaus = boostedTaus2.ak4PFJets.clone(
boostedTaus3.CMSBoostedTauSeedingParameters,
#src = cms.InputTag('pfNoPileUpForBoostedTaus'),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

even if commented out, you can remove type specification also here

@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@
# and eta x phi size of strip increasing for low pT photons

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

plugin parameter in modStrips forgotten

@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@
# and eta x phi size of strip increasing for low pT photons

modStrips2 = strips.clone(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Also forgotten makeCombinatoricStrips at L84

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d8154e/9863/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2542225
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2542202
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 34 files compared)
  • Checked 149 log files, 22 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 12, 2020

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1
Tested at: 4facfa9
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d8154e/9876/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-10-11-2300
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d8154e/9876/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2542225
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2542202
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 34 files compared)
  • Checked 149 log files, 22 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

+1

  • Type specification dropped from cloned and modified configs as planned
  • Jenkins tests pass and show no differences wrt baseline

@Martin-Grunewald
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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)

@silviodonato
Copy link
Contributor

+1

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

5 participants