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

Revert the requirement of having an associated L1T muon in L1TPhase2MuonOffline::matchMuonsToGen #39297

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 5, 2022

Conversation

perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

@perrotta perrotta commented Sep 3, 2022

PR description:

The fix I implemented in #39283 was not correct. The (quite convoluted) logic of the L1TPhase2MuonOffline class does require that a (generated muon, l1t muon) pair is created even if there is not a l1t muon. I restore here that feature as it was in origin, still maintaining all the other code improvements implemented in #39283

Also this PR will not fix the non reproducibility issue observed in DQM for the Phase2 L1T muon efficiency plots. Such a fix will require a more detailed check and debug, made this time not by the release manager but by the @cms-sw/dqm-l2 experts.

By the way: who's filling the
L1T__L1TPhase2_Muons_TkMuon_efficiencies_globalEfficiencies
L1T__L1TPhase2_Muons_SAMuon_efficiencies_globalEfficiencies
histos? I supposed it was the L1TPhase2MuonOffline class that I was trying to fix, but I start to doubt it... That class fills the differential efficiencies, instead. Perhaps some harvester called after it?

Could some @cms-sw/dqm-l2 and/or @cms-sw/l1-l2 experts investigate, and at least identify who's filling the non reproducible histo?

PR validation:

It builds

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Sep 3, 2022

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-39297/31977

  • This PR adds an extra 12KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Sep 3, 2022

A new Pull Request was created by @perrotta (Andrea Perrotta) for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • DQMOffline/L1Trigger (dqm, l1)

@epalencia, @emanueleusai, @ahmad3213, @cmsbuild, @rekovic, @jfernan2, @pmandrik, @micsucmed, @cecilecaillol, @rvenditti can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rociovilar this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor Author

perrotta commented Sep 3, 2022

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Sep 3, 2022

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-267829/27307/summary.html
COMMIT: 9f304cf
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_6_X_2022-09-02-2300/el8_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/39297/27307/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: 6 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 51
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3618210
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 71
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3618117
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 50 files compared)
  • Checked 212 log files, 49 edm output root files, 51 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@emanueleusai
Copy link
Member

emanueleusai commented Sep 5, 2022

@perrotta we will investigate (if #39301 doesn't fix it)

@emanueleusai
Copy link
Member

+1

  • differences in L1T DQM plots expected

@cecilecaillol
Copy link
Contributor

+l1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Sep 5, 2022

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

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor Author

perrotta commented Sep 5, 2022

+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