Run3-sim88 Make use of ESGetToken in a number of Analyzers used for SIM data

[bsunanda]

PR description:

Make use of ESGetToken in a number of Analyzers used for SIM data

PR validation:

Test using cfg's in the test areas

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

Nothing special

[cmsbuild]

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-34405/23808

• This PR adds an extra 40KB to repository

Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)

• code-format:
  https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-34405/23808/code-format.patch
  e.g. curl https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-34405/23808/code-format.patch | patch -p1
  You can also run scram build code-format to apply code format directly

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-34405/23810

• This PR adds an extra 44KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda (Sunanda Banerjee) for master.

It involves the following packages:

SimG4CMS/Forward (simulation)
SimG4CMS/HGCalTestBeam (upgrade, simulation)
SimG4CMS/HcalTestBeam (simulation)
SimG4CMS/ShowerLibraryProducer (simulation)

@mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @civanch, @srimanob, @kpedro88 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @cvuosalo, @rovere, @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

[bsunanda]

@cmsbuild Please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9d78fa/16621/summary.html
COMMIT: b89c8b5
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_0_X_2021-07-08-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/34405/16621/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: 5125 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 38
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2786260
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2786237
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 37 files compared)
• Checked 160 log files, 37 edm output root files, 38 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[civanch]

+1

[bsunanda]

@srimanob Please approve this

[qliphy]

"Reco comparison results: 5125 differences found in the comparisons"

@bsunanda Just to confirm, are the differences expected?

[srimanob]

@qliphy
Thanks for rechecking. I missed that warning. The difference is not only in Phase2, but also Run-2.
The change in code is on HGCAL. However, the PR also touches include lines in SimG4CMS which I don't expect to see a change.

Removing the signing from upgrade for now, until we have clarification.

[perrotta]

please test
(let give another try: it is hard to believe that this simulation related PR can affect in such a relevant way miniAOD jets, also in real data workflow)

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9d78fa/16953/summary.html
COMMIT: b89c8b5
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_0_X_2021-07-17-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/34405/16953/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

The 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

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 1224 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 38
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2786302
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3672
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 19
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2782589
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: -45.703 KiB( 37 files compared)
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): -44.531 KiB Hcal/DigiRunHarvesting
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): -1.172 KiB RPC/DCSInfo
• Checked 160 log files, 37 edm output root files, 38 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[perrotta]

Now there are widespread differences only in the HI workflow 140.53. But the input datasets used for the output comparisons in the baseline and in the PR test are different. Therefore these differences are explained.

[perrotta]

I think that the differences observed in miniAOD jets during the previous comparisons were transient: it may be interesting to understand what was who originated them, but it is quite unlikely that it was due to this PR

[bsunanda]

The differences are due to input changes. This PR only changes how the analyzers should access objects from Event Setup. They do not modify the Event in any way. These are not producers.

[srimanob]

+Upgrade

Yeah, the last test looks better.

[cmsbuild]

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, @perrotta (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[perrotta]

+1