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

Phase2-hgx205 Add a new scenario for HGCal V11 geometry version #27555

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 30, 2019

Conversation

bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

Add a new scenario 2026D46 with V11 geometry version of HGCal. Also a new workflow 22034 is worked out

PR validation:

Tested with the new workflow

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR:

No back porting is needed

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-27555/10948

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/Eras
Configuration/Geometry
Configuration/PyReleaseValidation
Configuration/StandardSequences
Geometry/CMSCommonData
L1Trigger/Configuration

@cmsbuild, @benkrikler, @Dr15Jones, @cvuosalo, @civanch, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @pgunnell, @rekovic, @franzoni, @kpedro88, @zhenhu, @prebello, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@vargasa, @makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @dgulhan this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cmsbuild Please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jul 18, 2019

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/1531/console Started: 2019/07/18 19:09

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

please abort

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Jenkins tests are aborted.

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

please test workflow 22034.0

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jul 18, 2019

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/1532/console Started: 2019/07/18 20:31

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-5b1287/1587/summary.html

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

  • /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/results/JR-comparison/PR-5b1287/22034.0_TTbar_14TeV+TTbar_14TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_2026D46_GenSimHLBeamSpotFull14+DigiFullTrigger_2026D46+RecoFullGlobal_2026D46+HARVESTFullGlobal_2026D46

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 32
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2622600
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2622298
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 302
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 31 files compared)
  • Checked 133 log files, 14 edm output root files, 32 DQM output files

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

+upgrade
new workflow runs, output logs look normal

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor Author

@zhenhu, @prebello, @rekovic Please sign this PR

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

+operations

the update of Eras and geometry configurations is coherent with the purpose of the PR and appears correct

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

@zhenhu @prebello the update of PyRelVal looks ok and straightforward, please check and sign or comment

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

@rekovic the update of the L1 configuration looks a minimal update of the existing one, with a protection for the HGcal v11. Please check and sign it, I would like to merge this PR asap

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

@zhenhu @prebello I would like to move forward with this PR, could you please check it?

@prebello
Copy link
Contributor

+1

I don't seem any problem with it

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

@rekovic @benkrikler please check and sign

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

merge

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit b4e9a4f into cms-sw:master Jul 30, 2019
@bsunanda bsunanda deleted the Phase2-hgx205 branch July 30, 2019 21:49
@@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ def runSelected(opt):
20034.0, #2026D35 ttbar (MTD TDR baseline)
20434.0, #2026D41 ttbar (L1T TDR baseline)
21234.0, #2026D44 (exercise HF nose)
22034.0, #2026D46 ttbar (exercise V11 HGCal)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@kpedro88
can we consolidate some of the exercise this and that workflows some time soon?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we were going to remove one right now, it would probably be D35. At some point, D44 will be replaced with a new version of the HF nose based on D46. But with different geometries that imply code changes, I am reluctant to remove them from regular tests, because things easily break (as we have seen in the past). I agree that we should try not to exceed the current number of workflows (4) if possible.

@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ Calorimeters:
* C4: HGCal (v9) + Phase2 HCAL and EB
* C6: HGCal (v9) + HFNose + Phase2 HCAL and EB
* C8: HGCal (v10 post TDR HGCal Geometry) + Phase2 HCAL and EB + Tracker cables in calorimeter region
* C9: HGCal (v11 post TDR HGCal Geometry same as V8 + corner centering for HE part)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

did it really mean to say "same as V8" (C3 defined in 2016), or was it supposed to say "same as C8"?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it should be C8. @bsunanda ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes it should be C8 - I shall correct this when I make the new PR with updated HGCal with HFNose

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.

7 participants