NanoAOD developments: 190520 version [102X]

[peruzzim]

backport of #26844

Updated set of NANOAOD developments for 10_2_X, includes and extends #26769.
Depends on #26794, cms-sw/cmsdist#4967, cms-sw/cmsdist#4970.

Includes backport of #26672

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-2d3eb9/410/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• ROOTFileChecks: Some differences in event products or their sizes found
• Reco comparison results: 202 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 31
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3007440
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 34
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 9
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3007207
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 190
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 25.727 KiB( 30 files compared)
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 1325.7 ): 25.727 KiB Physics/NanoAODDQM
• Checked 129 log files, 14 edm output root files, 31 DQM output files

[peruzzim]

+xpog

changes only in NANOAOD, all workflows running, also successfully re-tested in the integration repo after the minor fixes

[perrotta]

+1

• Changes wrt 10_2_X baseline do not affect reco packages, only nanoAOD and Configuration/PyReleaseValidation

[kpedro88]

+upgrade

[santocch]

+1

[fabiocos]

@prebello @zhenhu do you have any issue with this PR, or could you please otherwise sign? I understand that the update of the nano step is needed to properly use the fix for the ECAL MET (@peruzzim please confirm), it is entering nowhere else.

[peruzzim]

@fabiocos do you mean the change in relval configuration in commit 9cbf96d?
That modifier is needed to redo few things on top of 102X miniAOD (not the fixed MET, but rather filter bits and scales&smearings), it's what we have been using already in NanoAODv4 production - updating relval configuration was forgotten and fixed in #26672, that is now backported.
New steps are added and the configuration of only one workflow is altered, so it cannot enter anywhere outside of workflow 136.8521. I would expect such a minor thing not to delay integration significantly.

[prebello]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_10_2_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_11_0_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[fabiocos]

+1