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
PPS: update of era modifiers #33250
PPS: update of era modifiers #33250
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33250/21712
|
A new Pull Request was created by @jan-kaspar for master. It involves the following packages: Configuration/Eras @perrotta, @andrius-k, @kmaeshima, @ErnestaP, @ahmad3213, @cmsbuild, @silviodonato, @franzoni, @jfernan2, @slava77, @jpata, @qliphy, @rvenditti, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
@cmsbuild please test |
-1 Failed Tests: RelVals AddOn RelVals
AddOn Tests
Expand to see more addon errors ... |
I've analysed most of the failing tests from #33250 (comment). All of them have As far as I understand, the test failures are not due to a bug in this PR, but due to the fact that this PR fixes a bug which prevented observing the problem earlier. It has to do with this line: This has not been intercepted by my tests since they use the geometry loaded from XML files - and this is correct. As far as I understand, we need urgently to upload the Run3 (diamond) geometry to DB, otherwise we are stuck. @forthommel @wpcarvalho @clemencia : can you please double check my assessment and, if correct, could you please update the Run3 DB and GTs (to be compatible with the XML files in the CMSSW code)? @fabferro FYI |
FYI @cms-sw/geometry-l2 |
FYI @cms-sw/alca-l2 |
@jan-kaspar why the comparisons for the "direct simulation" posted in the PR description do not show differences in the 2021 case? If I understand correctly your explanation for the origin of the failing tests, without this PR you should have picked the run2 geometry for that test, while with this PR the correct run3 geometry (in your case, as taken from the xml file) should have been used instead. (By the way, for the "reconstruction" case there is no "2021" run3 comparison in your plots) |
Unlike other WFs, the "direct" simulation loads the geometry from XML files (where the Run3 geometry is already correct):
This comparison may be better called "LHC data reco" comparison as it is run on real LHC data. Obviously, they do not yet exist for Run3, thus they are missing there. |
I started looking at the problem and hope we can provide a solution soon. |
@cvuosalo , in the new Run-3 geometry we have also diamond detectors or not yet? |
@civanch The Run 3 simulation geometry for 11_3 contains a PPS diamond detector assembly. |
@jan-kaspar @wpcarvalho : having the updated PPS run3 geometry in the GT goes beyond the limited scope of this PR. |
I agree, updating the geometry is conceptually unrelated to this PR. This PR just unveils a problem which should have been fixed earlier. This problem now blocks this PR and other PPS developments and therefore, I agree, the geometry problem should be addressed quasi immediately. We discussed it in the PPS SW meeting yesterday and indeed we gave this fix the highest priority. |
Sorry for not replying earlier, for some unknown reason the GitHub notifications started to go to my Spam folder. |
test parameters: workflow = 11725.0,11925.0 |
please test |
-1 Failed Tests: UnitTests AddOn Unit TestsI found errors in the following unit tests: ---> test TestDQMOfflineConfiguration150 had ERRORS ---> test TestDQMOfflineConfiguration50 had ERRORS AddOn Tests
Expand to see more addon errors ...Comparison SummaryThe workflows 140.53 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons @slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Summary:
|
This PR has been included in #33415 |
-1 |
Closing as included in #33415 |
PR description:
This PR proposes a tiny reorganisation of (CT)PPS era modifiers in order to avoid mistakes and provide flexibility needed for Run 3. The motivation and the selected solution are described in #33080 and PPS SW meeting presentation on 10 Mar 2021. In brief, the changes include:
ctpps
introduced - turned on for all eras where PPS was/is activectpps_2016
is restricted to 2016 onlyThis update shall be transparent whenever
Run2_20XY
orRun3
modifier chains are used.This is a technical update, no change in test results expected.
No backport is foreseen.
PR validation:
Below, two comparisons before this PR (blue) vs. after the PR (red dashed) are attached:
No change observed, as expected.