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 specifications in RecoJets #32787

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 2, 2021
Merged

Conversation

jeongeun
Copy link
Contributor

@jeongeun jeongeun commented Feb 2, 2021

PR description:

Update the safer syntax for existing parameter :

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

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.
(submitted PR for RecoJets is PR#31162. )

In this PR, a total of 5 files changed.

RecoJets/Configuration 1 file
RecoJets/JetPlusTracks 1 file
RecoJets/JetProducers 3 file

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

cmsbuild commented Feb 2, 2021

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32787/20954

  • This PR adds an extra 20KB to repository

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

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 2, 2021

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

It involves the following packages:

RecoJets/Configuration
RecoJets/JetPlusTracks
RecoJets/JetProducers

@perrotta, @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rappoccio, @jdolen, @yslai, @jdamgov, @ahinzmann, @nhanvtran, @gkasieczka, @clelange, @schoef, @mariadalfonso, @seemasharmafnal 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

perrotta commented Feb 2, 2021

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 2, 2021

-1

Failed Tests: RelVals-INPUT
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-41dadc/12638/summary.html
COMMIT: 62a6e5d
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_3_X_2021-02-01-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/32787/12638/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

  • DAS Queries: The DAS query tests failed, see the summary page for details.

RelVals-INPUT

  • 37.0DAS Error
  • 39.0DAS Error

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 5 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 37
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2752926
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 11
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2752893
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 36 files compared)
  • Checked 156 log files, 37 edm output root files, 37 DQM output files

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

perrotta commented Feb 2, 2021

+1

  • Technical, following the intention declared in the PR title and description
  • Jenkins tests pass, with no differences in output (while two RelVals-INPUT workflows fail because of a DAS error)
  • (The two failing RelVals have a DAS error, which is completely unrelated from this purely technical PR: I don't think it is worth wasting resources to re-run the tests hoping for the DAS glitch being resolved, but I'll let the release managers to consider doing it, if they think so)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 2, 2021

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (but tests are reportedly failing). 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

@silviodonato
Copy link
Contributor

merge

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit d7900d8 into cms-sw:master Feb 2, 2021
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