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

DataFormats for Phase-2 L1T-HLT #32150

Merged
merged 21 commits into from
Dec 8, 2020

Conversation

trtomei
Copy link
Contributor

@trtomei trtomei commented Nov 15, 2020

This PR adds additional infrastructure for the L1T-HLT interface for Phase2.
It is a sister PR to #32137
We add a couple new DataFormats to allow selections on the new PF-based L1T objects.

We ran scram b runtests with success.

We ran runTheMatrix.py -l limited -i all --ibeos with success.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32150/19822

  • This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository

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

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32150/19832

  • This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @trtomei (Thiago Tomei) for master.

It involves the following packages:

DataFormats/HLTReco
DataFormats/L1TParticleFlow

@cmsbuild, @kpedro88, @jmduarte, @Martin-Grunewald, @rekovic, @fwyzard can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rovere 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

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 16, 2020

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1

Tested at: 972f0b6

CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-11-15-2300
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820
You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-0ceae2/10782/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: Build

  • Build:

I found compilation error when building:

>> Compiling edm plugin /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-11-15-2300/src/HLTrigger/HLTcore/plugins/TriggerSummaryAnalyzerAOD.cc
>> Compiling edm plugin /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-11-15-2300/src/HLTrigger/HLTcore/plugins/TriggerSummaryAnalyzerRAW.cc
>> Compiling edm plugin /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-11-15-2300/src/HLTrigger/HLTcore/plugins/TriggerSummaryProducerAOD.cc
>> Compiling edm plugin /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-11-15-2300/src/HLTrigger/HLTcore/plugins/TriggerSummaryProducerRAW.cc
/data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-11-15-2300/src/HLTrigger/HLTcore/plugins/TriggerSummaryProducerAOD.cc: In member function 'virtual void TriggerSummaryProducerAOD::produce(edm::StreamID, edm::Event&, const edm::EventSetup&) const':
/data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-11-15-2300/src/HLTrigger/HLTcore/plugins/TriggerSummaryProducerAOD.cc:336:3: error: parse error in template argument list
   fillTriggerObjectCollections(
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-run-pr-tests/CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-11-15-2300/src/HLTrigger/HLTcore/plugins/TriggerSummaryProducerAOD.cc:337:80: error: no matching function for call to 'TriggerSummaryProducerAOD::fillTriggerObjectCollections< >(trigger::TriggerObjectCollection&, std::map&, std::vector >&, trigger::Keys&, edm::Event&, const edm::GetterOfProducts >&, TriggerSummaryProducerAOD::InputTagSet&) const'
       toc, offset, tags, keys, iEvent, getPFJetCollection_, collectionTagsEvent);
                                                                                ^


@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@trtomei
Copy link
Contributor Author

trtomei commented Nov 16, 2020

Hm, I did compile this successfully. Let me see if I understand what is wrong.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 1, 2020

+1
Tested at: 8fe8a28
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-0ceae2/11193/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_3_X_2020-11-30-1100
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc900

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 1, 2020

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 1, 2020

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-0ceae2/11193/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2529593
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 2
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2529569
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 34 files compared)
  • Checked 148 log files, 34 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

kpedro88 commented Dec 2, 2020

+upgrade

@Martin-Grunewald
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@trtomei
Copy link
Contributor Author

trtomei commented Dec 7, 2020

Dear @rekovic , @cbotta , please check this PR. Notice that this is not the CondFormats PR, this is the the DataFormats one. We need this one to allow selections on the new PF-based L1T objects, independent of any scaling functions.

@rekovic
Copy link
Contributor

rekovic commented Dec 8, 2020

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 8, 2020

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

@silviodonato
Copy link
Contributor

+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.

9 participants