-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
Run3-sim126 Try to adress complaints from static analyser for SimG4CMS/Calo #39209
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-39209/31826
|
A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda (Sunanda Banerjee) for master. It involves the following packages:
@cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
@cmsbuild Please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6a337b/27113/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, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
Curiously enough, this causes differences in the efficiencies for Phase2 muons |
I do not think that the Phase 2 L1T muons discrepancies have anything to do with this PR. They also show in other PRs, like e.g. #39193 . |
+1 |
PR description:
Try to avoid complaints from static analyser for SimG4CMS/Calo
PR validation:
Use the runTheMatrix test workflows
If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:
Nothing special