-
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
Bugs to fix when turning CMSSW_9_0_0_pre4 into CMSSW_8_3_0 #17386
Comments
A new Issue was created by @davidlange6 David Lange. @davidlange6, @Dr15Jones, @smuzaffar can you please review it and eventually sign/assign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here #13029 |
Issues I'm aware of
|
The specific ME0 commit to revert is #17175. |
you may want to include #17390 (just removing some forgotten couts for phase2) |
#17390 is also in pre4. |
#17438 (needed for ConfDB parsing) - bug fixes in py files |
Some printouts that need fixing *** MonitorElement: WARNING:setBinLabel: attempting to set label of non-existent bin number for ME: Hcal/DigiPhase1Task/OccupancyCut/FED/ %MSG-w TrackerValidationVariables: SiPixelPhase1TrackResiduals:SiPixelPhase1TrackResidualsAnalyzer TrackerValidationVariables::fillHitQuantities() 10-Feb-2017 15:15:06 CE |
FYI, I ran a test for the ME0 reversion to check that GEN-SIM can be reused:
Then the following script (derived from runTheMatrix for 22823.0, using input GEN-SIM file from
The test successfully ran to completion with no strange or unexpected error messages in the logs. |
please consider #17412 as a fix for 900pre4 |
#17539 likely addresses the tracker dqm messages |
@kpedro88 - regarding the muon changes above, is there any point in worrying about phase 2 in 8_3_0 ? I guess that without more changes from tracking/trigger this is not a useful release? |
I guess we should ask the upgrade studies conveners - if they plan to wait for e.g. tracking fake rate fixes to do another production, then it doesn't matter (but we'll then have to remember to revert the ME0 PR for 8_4_0...) |
last week the statement was that they didn’t plan to use 830. but if you can get an update that would be great.
… On Feb 20, 2017, at 4:22 PM, Kevin Pedro ***@***.***> wrote:
I guess we should ask the upgrade studies conveners - if they plan to wait for e.g. tracking fake rate fixes to do another production, then it doesn't matter (but we'll then have to remember to revert the ME0 PR for 8_4_0...)
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
8.3.0 is needed for urgent studies for 2017, not for upgrade studies |
we got a tentative no from upgrade so I'll leave out the ME0 revert for the moment. |
my current recipe is #17438 #17412 #17539 #17582 #17579 (issues in harvesting step currently) #17576 #17572 git cms-addpkg Configuration/PyReleaseValidation git fetch git@github.com:davidlange6/cmssw hcaldqm |
maybe someone will solve the issues with 17579 before the other tests finish, otherwise I'll go ahead. |
my build was ok- missing the validation go ahead. |
please add pointers to PRs or discussions here. (this is not for new features..)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: