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

Removal of useless ByLayer( functions to fix build errors #134

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 26, 2024

Conversation

VourMa
Copy link
Collaborator

@VourMa VourMa commented Nov 26, 2024

As per title, fixing cms-sw#45117 (comment).

@slava77
Copy link

slava77 commented Nov 26, 2024

/run all

@slava77
Copy link

slava77 commented Nov 26, 2024

let's see if PRs to master are testable

Copy link

The PR was built and ran successfully in standalone mode. Here are some of the comparison plots.

Efficiency vs pT comparison Efficiency vs eta comparison
Fake rate vs pT comparison Fake rate vs eta comparison
Duplicate rate vs pT comparison Duplicate rate vs eta comparison

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

Here is a timing comparison:

   Evt    Hits       MD       LS      T3       T5       pLS       pT5      pT3      TC       Reset    Event     Short             Rate
   avg     40.9    388.4    193.0    131.0    137.0    502.5    118.6    248.1    101.6      3.3    1864.6    1321.2+/- 369.1     491.7   explicit[s=4] (target branch)
   avg     40.0    387.7    191.4    129.8    137.2    510.1    118.1    252.8    102.1      3.2    1872.5    1322.3+/- 370.5     495.4   explicit[s=4] (this PR)

Copy link

The PR was built and ran successfully with CMSSW. Here are some plots.

OOTB All Tracks
Efficiency and fake rate vs pT, eta, and phi

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

Copy link

@slava77 slava77 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this can go upstream to cms-sw/cmssw as a separate PR; no need to couple with our devel migration

@VourMa
Copy link
Collaborator Author

VourMa commented Nov 26, 2024

I think this can go upstream to cms-sw/cmssw as a separate PR; no need to couple with our devel migration

That's what I was thinking as well. I will make it later today.

@slava77 slava77 merged commit 0d8409a into master Nov 26, 2024
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants