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
Prepare runToCompletion() for concurrent runs #38030
Conversation
Change exceptionMessageRuns_ to atomic<bool> along with side effects of that. This will be necessary for concurrent runs and is similar to what we currently do for lumis. Plus deletion of some obsolete unused lines of code, (including an unused set of braces that changes indentation on a number of lines of code that are otherwise unchanged)
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-38030/30103
|
A new Pull Request was created by @wddgit (W. David Dagenhart) for master. It involves the following packages:
@cmsbuild, @smuzaffar, @Dr15Jones, @makortel can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
please test (When reviewing this it will probably be easier if you hide the whitespace changes) |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-a76cbe/24884/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+1 |
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:
Change exceptionMessageRuns_ to be an atomic bool along with fixing side effects of that. This will be necessary for concurrent runs and is similar to what we currently do for lumis.
Plus deletion of some obsolete unused lines of code, (including an unused set of braces that changes indentation on a number of lines of code that are otherwise unchanged)
PR validation:
This shouldn't change behavior in any detectable way until we implement concurrent runs so I am relying on existing unit tests. In a manual test, I caused exceptions to be thrown "while trying to clean up runs after the primary fatal exception" and the printout looks as expected.