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
Added new HLTfilter to select L3 and L2 muons #36239
Conversation
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36239/26872
Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)
|
This PR can't proceed without first passing code checks. Please follow |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36239/26895
|
A new Pull Request was created by @alexsr-98 for master. It involves the following packages:
@cmsbuild, @missirol, @Martin-Grunewald can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
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.
A first round of comments. I have not completed yet the review of HLTMuonL3orL2PreFilter::hltFilter
, but these can be addressed in the meantime.
if (L2tk->normalizedChi2() > max_NormalizedChi2_L2_) | ||
FailedL2 = true; | ||
|
||
if (recoBeamSpotHandle.isValid()) { |
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.
if (recoBeamSpotHandle.isValid()) { | |
if (useBeamspot_) { | |
if (not recoBeamSpotHandle.isValid()) { throw cms::Exception("") << ""; } |
(the suggestion is pseudo-code..)
If the beamspot handle is invalid (e.g. due to a typo in the InputTag), certain cuts/selections are silently skipped. It would be safer to add a boolean useBeamspot
in the PSet, and to throw an exception if useBeamspot==true and recoBeamSpotHandle.isValid() == false
.
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 have added the exception but I think that it is not necessary to include another parameter to use the beam spot. If you want to use the cuts that are implemented under this bracket you can change for example the parameter max_Dz_. The beam spot is used only to compute Dz (the impact parameter in the z direction).
Sorry, but 'the code compiles' is insufficient as validation, please run a trigger path exercising this filter and check(!) that it performs as intended in terms of recording L2/L3 candidates, and that this is done (technical) correctly by adding to your HLT path with the new plugin also the HLTriggerFinalPath which does the packing up (and will complain with error messages in case of miscodings). Or in other words: first develop your trigger paths using this code in your developer area, present to the TSG efficiencies, rates and timing, and then submit code (CMSSW PR) and JIRA ticket (request for integration of a/the new path[s]). |
@Martin-Grunewald we are in the process of developing a new reconstruction sequence for long-lived particles, and this filter has been fully validated in our development area with a mockup path that we are using for validation of efficiencies, rates and timing.The final HLT that we will propose will come after. The motivation for this PR is that we need to share the reconstruction sequence with other groups and we did plan to use confdb for this, and if I'm not mistaken, we would need this filter to be merged in order to be picked by confDB. |
OK, that's good. Still, more checking is needed as per my code comment above - you should have seen error messages arising from one of the modules in the HLTriggerFinalPath... |
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36239/26941 ERROR: Build errors found during clang-tidy run.
|
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36239/26942 ERROR: Build errors found during clang-tidy run.
|
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36239/28212
Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)
|
Applied patch for code quality checks Apply suggestions from code review Applied some suggestions from code review. Co-authored-by: Marino Missiroli <m.missiroli@cern.ch> Apply suggestions from code review Applied more suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Marino Missiroli <m.missiroli@cern.ch> Adressed first set of comments of the PR and added a customizer to implement the filter Applied patch for code quality checks Apply suggestions from code review Applied some suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Marino Missiroli <m.missiroli@cern.ch> Applied suggestions from code review Applied code checks Applied comments from the PR Applied comment Applied code checks Apply suggestions from code review Implemented some comments from PR review. Co-authored-by: Marino Missiroli <m.missiroli@cern.ch> Implemented comments from PR review. Implemented code checks and removed customizer file Implemented comments from PR review Implemented code checks Reorganized the code to make it clearer and removed repeated code Applied code checks Implemented comments from PR review Applied code checks Small fix in the fillDescriptions function Applied comments from PR Applied code checks Renamed plugin Applied code checks
bbea25b
to
00be3e9
Compare
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36239/28213
|
Pull request #36239 was updated. @cmsbuild, @missirol, @Martin-Grunewald can you please check and sign again. |
please test @alexsr-98 , the implementation looks okay to me, thanks. The PR tests here won't exercise this new plugin (other than compiling it), so I assume you verified in your HLT studies that the latest version of the plugin produces the intended physics results (if not, please do verify this). Also, since the plugin content has slightly changed during the review ("or" -> "and"), please update the PR title and description accordingly if need be. |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-75a98a/22282/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
Yes, I've checking it during the revision and it behaves as expected. |
+hlt
|
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. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description:
PR validation: