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

Phase2-gex82 Add 2 new phase2 scenarios 2026D85 and 2026D86 #34481

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jul 15, 2021

Conversation

bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

Add 2 new phase2 scenarios 2026D85 and 2026D86. This contains new definition of MTD (Fabio, Marta), HGCal and support structure for GE0

PR validation:

Tested with 2 new workflows: 38234.0 and 38634.0

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

Nothing special

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-34481/23939

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda (Sunanda Banerjee) for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • Configuration/Geometry (geometry, upgrade)
  • Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (pdmv, upgrade)
  • Configuration/StandardSequences (operations)
  • Geometry/CMSCommonData (geometry, upgrade)
  • Geometry/MTDCommonData (geometry, upgrade)

@civanch, @Dr15Jones, @jordan-martins, @chayanit, @cvuosalo, @wajidalikhan, @ianna, @kpedro88, @cmsbuild, @makortel, @srimanob, @silviodonato, @mdhildreth, @kskovpen, @bbilin, @qliphy, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@fabiocos, @vargasa, @makortel, @mtosi, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @lecriste, @felicepantaleo, @ebrondol, @mmusich, @dgulhan, @slomeo this is something you requested to watch as well.
@silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy, @perrotta you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

* D78 = T22+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6
* D79 = T23+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6
* D80 = T25+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6
* D81 = T26+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6
* D82 = T21+C15+M9+I13+O7+F7
* D83 = T24+C16+M9+I13+O7+F6
* D84 = T24+C13+M7+I11+O6+F6 (For HGCAL study on evolution of HGCal replacing D70)
* D85 = T24+C14+M9+I14+O7+F6
* D86 = T24+C17+M10+I14+O8+F6
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This will conflict with the geometry introduced at #34120.
@adewit FYI

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I understand this only now. I did not realize that T27 is put in till I submitted this PR. If #34120 is merged, I shall take proper action

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For D86, do you want to jump both Calorimeter and Muon, not one-by-one as we usually do?

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cmsbuild Please test

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

The updated description of material in MTD scenario I14 as implemented by @martatornago has been presented in https://indico.cern.ch/event/1057473/contributions/4444289/attachments/2279146/3872237/ETLGeometryUpdate.pdf

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-02104d/16805/summary.html
COMMIT: 398ec5c
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_0_X_2021-07-13-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/34481/16805/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 38
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2786302
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2786279
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 37 files compared)
  • Checked 160 log files, 37 edm output root files, 38 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cmsbuild Please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-02104d/16823/summary.html
COMMIT: e773ff1
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_0_X_2021-07-13-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/34481/16823/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

The workflows 140.53 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 1268 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 38
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2786302
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3680
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 20
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2782580
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 45.699 KiB( 37 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): 44.531 KiB Hcal/DigiRunHarvesting
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): 1.172 KiB RPC/DCSInfo
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 312.0 ): -0.004 KiB MessageLogger/Warnings
  • Checked 160 log files, 37 edm output root files, 38 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

@adewit @mmusich
Would you mind to update #34120 to D87? Thanks in advance.

@@ -94,11 +99,13 @@ Several detector combinations have been generated:
* D68 = T21+C11+M6+I11+O5+F4 (For HGCAL study on evolution of detector)
* D70 = T21+C13+M7+I11+O6+F6 (For HGCAL study on evolution of detector)
* D76 = T21+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6
* D77 = T24+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6
* D77 = T24+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6 (Current default scenario)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What do you mean by the current default scenario?
The default scenario is D76.

Of course, we can try to move to D77 where T24==T21 but DD4hep support.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It cannot be. D77 is identical to D76. While D77 can run with dd4hep, D76 does not.

Copy link
Contributor

@srimanob srimanob Jul 15, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I understand. I just say that the current geometry we used for relvals and short matrix test is D76. We can propose to move from 12_0_0_pre5.

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor Author

Also C17, M10 and O8 go hand in hand. An improved muon version will come soon afterwards.

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

assign mtd-dpg

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

New categories assigned: mtd-dpg

@fabiocos,@parbol you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

+Upgrade

Note that I would like to get confirmation on moving from Tracker also as D85 are on both PRs.

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor Author

@fabiocos can you approve this PR?

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

+1

the MTD update was provided by the DPG based on the updates by @martatornago , from the tests performed no overlap is observed in scenario D85 . A corresponding update of Validation/Geometry will be proposed to exploit this PR. This will require an update of the material Borathed Polyetyl..

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

+mtd-dpg

@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, @perrotta (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

@silviodonato @qliphy @perrotta please check operations as well, my +1 approved (involuntarily) also that, although it looks ok to me (I had tried it already in my private test https://github.com/fabiocos/cmssw/tree/fc-etlv6 )

@qliphy
Copy link
Contributor

qliphy commented Jul 15, 2021

+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

8 participants