Fireworks 9_4_X: Fix bug in scaling after projected view destruction

[alja]

PR description:

This is back-port of #34655.

[alja]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_9_4_X IBs after it passes the integration tests and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_12_0_X is complete. 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)

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @alja (Alja Mrak-Tadel) for CMSSW_9_4_X.

It involves the following packages:

• Fireworks/Calo (visualization)

can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy, @perrotta you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6d4def/17320/summary.html
COMMIT: 084b197
CMSSW: CMSSW_9_4_X_2021-07-25-0000/slc6_amd64_gcc630
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/34680/17320/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: 1192 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 27
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2721493
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3734
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 50
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2717547
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 162
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[perrotta]

@alja
This backport is much heavier than the PR in the master, or its 10_3 counterpart.
Please either restrict to backport only the real fix, or explain in the PR description why do you need all the rest.

[alja]

@perrotta
The bugfix is isolated on 4 files that are within Fireworks/Calo event display. I don't know which part of this PR is concerning.

One of the event display users found a bug recently and this PR fixes. There is a workaround for it and the bug is not critical. I have tested it and I will send the test to the user as well today.

[perrotta]

@perrotta
The bugfix is isolated on 4 files that are within Fireworks/Calo event display. I don't know which part of this PR is concerning.

One of the event display users found a bug recently and this PR fixes. There is a workaround for it and the bug is not critical. I have tested it and I will send the test to the user as well today.

@alja you copied the four files from the master to 9_4_X: that imports back in 9_4_X all other changes that were integrated in the meanwhile, not only this fix.

After a visula inspection, I think that all those extra modificiations are only the code-checks/code-formats updates that were integrated during the cleaning campaigns: however, I also noticed (at least) another update that looks more relevant: perhaps is fine to have it also in 9_4_X, but it should be certified by you.

Even though a minimal backport with only the fixes would have been easier to evaluate and merge in a closed release, I think it can be still acceptable to merge this one in 9_4_X provided you verify and confirm that all the extra changes implemented (the one that I spotted and the possible other ones) are justified for that past release,

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #34680 was updated. @makortel, @alja, @cmsbuild, @Dr15Jones can you please check and sign again.

[alja]

@perrotta
Thank you for the through review. The check for minimum phi range was not existing in newer releases. I have inserted back the referenced segment back. This check make a segment marker in RhoPhi projection visible if there is a tiny phi range. I will keep an eye on this in the newer releases.

[alja]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_9_4_X IBs after it passes the integration tests and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_12_1_X is complete. 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)

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6d4def/17374/summary.html
COMMIT: ad0ae95
CMSSW: CMSSW_9_4_X_2021-07-25-0000/slc6_amd64_gcc630
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/34680/17374/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: 1192 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 27
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2721493
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3745
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 50
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2717536
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 162
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[perrotta]

+1