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

a first unit test for backward compatibility of Scouting data formats [13_0_X] #41168

Merged

Conversation

missirol
Copy link
Contributor

backport of #41093

PR description:

This PR adds a unit test to catch non-backward-compatible changes to the Scouting data formats.

From the description of #41093:

This PR adds a refined version of the unit test described in #41040 (comment) [*]. The aim of the test is to fail whenever non-backward-compatible changes are introduced in the Scouting data formats.

The implementation of the test could certainly be improved (one suggestion is in #41040 (comment)), but I decided to open a draft PR because I think the test in this PR is better than nothing. (I plan to address #41040 (comment), but I don't have an ETA for that.)

[*]

More precisely, there are two unit tests, one for the Run-2 Scouting data formats ("Scouting*"), and one for the Run-3 ones ("Run3Scouting*"). The two tests have the same structure:

  • a 1st step reads O(100) events from an existing EDM file, and writes the Scouting collections to disk (this first step should fail if non-backward-compatible changes are made to the data formats);

  • a 2nd step uses FWLite to print to stdout one entry/object for each of the Scouting data formats being tested. To check that the correct values are read, the test compares the output of step-2 to a reference in the form of a text file. This is currently done for 1 object per data format. It might be necessary to check more than 1 object (and/or more than 1 event), because Add additional track variables to the Run 3 scouting electron collection for low pT electrons. #41025 (comment) showed that some issues can only be spotted when checking multiple objects/events.

PR validation:

The new unit tests pass locally.

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:

#41093

Unit test for Scouting data formats in the release cycle currently used online.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 24, 2023

A new Pull Request was created by @missirol (Marino Missiroli) for CMSSW_13_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

  • DataFormats/Scouting (core)

@cmsbuild, @smuzaffar, @Dr15Jones, @makortel can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rovere 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

@missirol
Copy link
Contributor Author

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-75a142/31576/summary.html
COMMIT: a6cafc9
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_0_X_2023-03-23-2300/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/41168/31576/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • You potentially removed 5 lines from the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 8 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 49
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3552993
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 9
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3552962
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 48 files compared)
  • Checked 213 log files, 164 edm output root files, 49 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor

+core

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_13_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_13_1_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)

@missirol
Copy link
Contributor Author

hold

Unit test fails on PowerPC, see #41189.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request has been put on hold by @missirol
They need to issue an unhold command to remove the hold state or L1 can unhold it for all

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #41168 was updated. @cmsbuild, @smuzaffar, @Dr15Jones, @makortel can you please check and sign again.

@missirol
Copy link
Contributor Author

The latest push backports the fix in #41219 for PowerPC builds.

I don't know if the "hold" should stay: the pyroot issue described in #41189 and #41222 may, or may not, require further changes to the unit test. Maybe it's better to wait a bit.

@missirol
Copy link
Contributor Author

unhold

The pyroot issue described in #41189 and #41222 hasn't been solved yet. Given that ROOT6_X IBs do not run for 13_0_X, I dare say this backport could be merged. I let Core-Sw decide.

@cmsbuild cmsbuild removed the hold label Apr 24, 2023
@makortel
Copy link
Contributor

+core

Let's get them in. In the longer term we'll working on an alternative testing mechanism (in reaction to #41348, along #41395)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_13_0_X IBs after it passes the integration tests and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_13_1_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)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-75a142/32142/summary.html
COMMIT: a777727
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_0_X_2023-04-25-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/41168/32142/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • You potentially removed 14 lines from the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 3 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 49
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3554298
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3554273
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 48 files compared)
  • Checked 213 log files, 164 edm output root files, 49 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

perrotta commented Apr 26, 2023

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 93abea9 into cms-sw:CMSSW_13_0_X Apr 26, 2023
10 checks passed
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

5 participants