Backport of "Update of some HLT filters for Egamma paths entering in 73X"

[matteosan1]

Backport to 72X of PR 5772

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @matteosan1 (Matteo Sani) for CMSSW_7_2_X.

Backport of "Update of some HLT filters for Egamma paths entering in 73X"

It involves the following packages:

Calibration/EcalAlCaRecoProducers
HLTrigger/Egamma
HLTrigger/HLTfilters
HLTrigger/special

@perrotta, @cmsbuild, @diguida, @cerminar, @Martin-Grunewald, @nclopezo, @rcastello, @fwyzard, @mmusich can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@argiro this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
@nclopezo you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 1cdcf33
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-5964/342/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-5964/342/summary.html

[davidlange6]

@diguida - what is the plan for this PR?

[diguida]

@davidlange6
I can do the same as the one for IsoTrack. This back port is technically ok, i.e. same code changes as the 73X version, but there are some things which should be fixed, as reported privately to the developers.
So, I can do the following: approve it, but require to back port all the bug fixes I requested.
Is this ok?

[diguida]

+1
Conditional approval: see comments on #5772

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_2_X IBs unless changes (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @nclopezo, @ktf, @smuzaffar

[perrotta]

Dear @diguida and @matteosan1.
I'm just trying to understand better the status of this PR, even if it was already merged: do I understand correctly that the fixes you are talking about have not been included yet even in 73X? If so: what are the plans for integrating those fixes (which I assume not truly fundamental, at this point)? If not, which is the PR with the fixes in 73X that has to be backported?
Thank you,
Andrea

[matteosan1]

Hi @perrotta,
the updates that @diguida asked refer to removal of unnecessary copies
of fed collection in the loop storing the "interesting feds" and
something similar about the geometry.
From the technical point of view the PR is fully functional, we have
just to improve the performance (I was working on it in the last days).
Clearly all the improvements done on 73X code will be backported to 72
as well.

On 25.11.2014 10:38, perrotta wrote:

Dear @diguida https://github.com/diguida and @matteosan1
https://github.com/matteosan1.
I'm just trying to understand better the status of this PR, even if it
was already merged: do I understand correctly that the fixes you are
talking about have not been included yet even in 73X? If so: what are
the plans for integrating those fixes (which I assume not truly
fundamental, at this point)? If not, which is the PR with the fixes in
73X that has to be backported?
Thank you,
Andrea

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5964 (comment).

Matteo Sani
University of California, San Diego
+41227671577