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

ECAL - Remove ExternalWork from EcalUncalibRecHitProducerGPU - 12_5_X #39257

Conversation

thomreis
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

This PR removes edm::ExternalWork from the EcalUncalibRecHitProducerGPU module since it is not needed as has been noted here: https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/37695/files#r872551283 .

No changes to the uncalibrated RecHits are expected.

PR validation:

Passes 11634.512.
No differences in uncalibrated RecHit amplitudes (100 events).
No significant difference in timing.

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:

Backport of #39193 for data taking.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 31, 2022

A new Pull Request was created by @thomreis (Thomas Reis) for CMSSW_12_5_X.

It involves the following packages:

  • RecoLocalCalo/EcalRecProducers (reconstruction)

@jpata, @cmsbuild, @mandrenguyen, @clacaputo can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@youyingli, @rchatter, @argiro, @apsallid, @thomreis, @simonepigazzini this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@thomreis
Copy link
Contributor Author

Backport of #39193 .

@thomreis
Copy link
Contributor Author

enable gpu

@thomreis
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cmsbuild please test

@rappoccio
Copy link
Contributor

@thomreis please rebase this as per comment here (#39193 (comment))

@thomreis
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @rappoccio, why? There is no conflict and the PR checks are assigned to the correct PR. Where is the discrepancy?

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-885f83/27229/summary.html
COMMIT: f857a49
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_5_X_2022-08-31-1100/el8_amd64_gcc10
Additional Tests: GPU
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/39257/27229/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

GPU Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • Reco comparison had 3 failed jobs
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 4
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 19876
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 8
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 19868
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 3 files compared)
  • Checked 12 log files, 9 edm output root files, 4 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 51
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3695708
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 23
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3695662
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.004 KiB( 50 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 312.0 ): 0.004 KiB MessageLogger/Warnings
  • Checked 212 log files, 49 edm output root files, 51 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor

assign heterogeneous
Since they signed the master version, I suppose they should sign the backports as well.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

New categories assigned: heterogeneous

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

@fwyzard
Copy link
Contributor

fwyzard commented Aug 31, 2022

+heterogeneous

Same commit as the 12.6.x PR (#39193)

@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor

+reconstruction

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_12_5_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_12_6_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

perrotta commented Sep 4, 2022

backport of #39193

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

perrotta commented Sep 4, 2022

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 757a2aa into cms-sw:CMSSW_12_5_X Sep 4, 2022
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

6 participants