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

drop type specs in RecoVertex RecoPixelVertexing #31784

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Oct 14, 2020

Conversation

jeongeun
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

Update the safer syntax for existing parameter :

  • drop type specifications where the original parameter exists.
  • move all parameter inside the clone

Instead of modifying parameters with full type specs, which can be interpreted as an insertion of a new parameter, it is a safer way to protect from parameter name mistakes and will also help in possible parameter migrations.
(The previous PR were PR#31162,PR#31243,PR#31332, PR#31389, PR#31523, PR#31538, PR#31748)

In this PR, total 5 files changed.

  • RecoVertex/Configuration : 2 files

  • RecoPixelVertexing/PixelLowPtUtilities : 2 files

  • RecoPixelVertexing/PixelTriplets : 1 file

PR validation:

Event Content comparison check was also done and there is no change with these updates.
Tested in CMSSW_11_2_X, the basic test all passed in the CMSSW PR instructions.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-31784/19043

  • This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @jeongeun (JeongEun Lee) for master.

It involves the following packages:

RecoPixelVertexing/PixelLowPtUtilities
RecoPixelVertexing/PixelTriplets
RecoVertex/Configuration

@perrotta, @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @rovere, @VinInn, @ebrondol, @mtosi, @dgulhan this is something you requested to watch as well.
@silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 14, 2020

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1

Tested at: 0ca3101

CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-10-13-2300
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820
You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6fa4ea/9942/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: Build Python3

  • Build:

I found compilation warning when building: See details on the summary page.

  • Python3:

I found errors:

*** Error compiling 'src/RecoPixelVertexing/PixelLowPtUtilities/python/ClusterShapeExtractor_cfi.py'...

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison not run due to Build errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped)

@@ -20,5 +20,5 @@

from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_phase2_tracker_cff import phase2_tracker
phase2_tracker.toModify(clusterShapeExtractor,
pixelSimLinkSrc = cms.InputTag('simSiPixelDigis', 'Pixel'),
pixelSimLinkSrc = 'simSiPixelDigis:Pixel'),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

indeed... A right parenthesis was left after the InputTag

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-31784/19057

  • This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #31784 was updated. @perrotta, @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 14, 2020

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1
Tested at: 26c731f
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6fa4ea/9953/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-10-14-1100
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6fa4ea/9953/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2543752
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 7
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2543723
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 34 files compared)
  • Checked 149 log files, 22 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

+1

  • Type specifications dropped as intended
  • Jenkins tests pass and show no differences

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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. @silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@silviodonato
Copy link
Contributor

+1

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

4 participants