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

Calo boundary Information #33056

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 4, 2021
Merged

Conversation

rovere
Copy link
Contributor

@rovere rovere commented Mar 3, 2021

PR description:

This PR adds the information at CALO boundary to the default configuration.

PR validation:

runTheMatrix limited.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 3, 2021

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33056/21361

  • This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 3, 2021

A new Pull Request was created by @rovere (Marco Rovere) for master.

It involves the following packages:

SimG4CMS/Calo
SimG4Core/Application

@cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @fabiocos, @slomeo 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

@rovere
Copy link
Contributor Author

rovere commented Mar 3, 2021

@cmsbuild please test

@rovere
Copy link
Contributor Author

rovere commented Mar 3, 2021

FYI @cseez

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 3, 2021

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-1c36a6/13249/summary.html
COMMIT: b8e1f85
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_3_X_2021-03-03-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/33056/13249/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • ROOTFileChecks: Some differences in event products or their sizes found
  • Reco comparison results: 2903 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 37
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2750983
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 106449
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2644511
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.004 KiB( 36 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 312.0 ): 0.004 KiB MessageLogger/Warnings
  • Checked 156 log files, 37 edm output root files, 37 DQM output files

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 4, 2021

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33056/21372

  • This PR adds an extra 32KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 4, 2021

Pull request #33056 was updated. @cmsbuild, @civanch, @mdhildreth can you please check and sign again.

@rovere
Copy link
Contributor Author

rovere commented Mar 4, 2021

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 4, 2021

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-1c36a6/13261/summary.html
COMMIT: 50db983
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_3_X_2021-03-03-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/33056/13261/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 2900 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 37
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2749431
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 78464
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2670945
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 36 files compared)
  • Checked 156 log files, 37 edm output root files, 37 DQM output files

DelivLuminosity = cms.double(5000.)
)

common_MCtruth = cms.PSet(
DoFineCalo = cms.bool(False),
SaveCaloBoundaryInformation = cms.bool(False),
Copy link
Contributor

@civanch civanch Mar 4, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@rovere , I am sorry, can you imagine that somebody want DoFineCalo=True and SaveCaloBoundaryInformation=False?

What is the use case?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@rovere rovere Mar 4, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ciao @civanch
thanks for looking into that!
The use case here is that we would like to have the information at the caloBoundary without requesting the full complexity of tracing everything within the fine-calo volumes.
The two flags, in this sense, are complementary.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

OK

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@rovere , why we see differences in Phase-2 WFs? I would expect regression for this PR. DD4Hep WF may be fine so far.

ciao @civanch
the flag is set to false for all workflows but for Phase2 ones.
The changes are mostly coming from SimTracks that are now saved if they have the crossedBoundary flag set. I found this useful to correctly assign hits to SimTrack and SimClusters.
The extent of the changes is rather limited and of limited impact on the high level Validation.

The DD4HEP workflows shows many differences, but I'm not sure where they are coming from, but you seem to suggest that is fine, right?

@civanch
Copy link
Contributor

civanch commented Mar 4, 2021

@rovere , why we see differences in Phase-2 WFs? I would expect regression for this PR. DD4Hep WF may be fine so far.

@civanch
Copy link
Contributor

civanch commented Mar 4, 2021

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 4, 2021

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

ciao @civanch
the flag is set to false for all workflows but for Phase2 ones.
The changes are mostly coming from SimTracks that are now saved if they have the crossedBoundary flag set. I found this useful to correctly assign hits to SimTrack and SimClusters.
The extent of the changes is rather limited and of limited impact on the high level Validation.

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