Porting l1t developments since December to cms-sw

[cecilecaillol]

PR description:

This PR contains changes done in the l1t branch since December (the minor changes that did not need an immediate integration to cms-sw).

PR validation:

All the PRs were validated in the l1t-offline repository, and have been used for weeks.

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

l1t-offline:l1t-integration-CMSSW_11_2_0

@rekovic

[cmsbuild]

@cecilecaillol, CMSSW_11_3_X branch is closed for direct updates. cms-bot is going to move this PR to master branch.
In future, please use cmssw master branch to submit your changes.

[cmsbuild]

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33118/21461

ERROR: Build errors found during clang-tidy run.

  if (cand.hwIso() > 4) {
  ^
L1Trigger/L1TGlobal/src/MuCondition.cc:487:23: error: use of undeclared identifier 'objPar' [clang-diagnostic-error]
  bool passIsoLUT = ((objPar.isolationLUT >> cand.hwIso()) & 1);
                      ^
L1Trigger/L1TGlobal/src/MuCondition.cc:487:46: error: use of undeclared identifier 'cand' [clang-diagnostic-error]
  bool passIsoLUT = ((objPar.isolationLUT >> cand.hwIso()) & 1);
                                             ^
L1Trigger/L1TGlobal/src/MuCondition.cc:488:3: error: expected unqualified-id [clang-diagnostic-error]
  if (!passIsoLUT) {
  ^
L1Trigger/L1TGlobal/src/MuCondition.cc:514:3: error: expected unqualified-id [clang-diagnostic-error]
  if (objPar.enableMip) {
  ^
L1Trigger/L1TGlobal/src/MuCondition.cc:525:3: error: expected unqualified-id [clang-diagnostic-error]
  return true;
  ^
L1Trigger/L1TGlobal/src/MuCondition.cc:526:1: error: extraneous closing brace ('}') [clang-diagnostic-error]
}
^
Suppressed 950 warnings (949 in non-user code, 1 with check filters).
--
gmake: *** [config/SCRAM/GMake/Makefile.coderules:128: code-checks] Error 2
gmake: *** [There are compilation/build errors. Please see the detail log above.] Error 2

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33118/21606

• This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #33118 was updated. @andrius-k, @kmaeshima, @ErnestaP, @ahmad3213, @cmsbuild, @rekovic, @jfernan2, @cecilecaillol, @rvenditti can you please check and sign again.

[jfernan2]

please test

[jfernan2]

@cecilecaillol is this going to be needed in the next MWGRs?

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-82783e/13550/summary.html
COMMIT: 64237aa
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_3_X_2021-03-16-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/33118/13550/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: 0 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 37
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2639881
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2639858
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 36 files compared)
• Checked 155 log files, 37 edm output root files, 37 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[jfernan2]

@cecilecaillol is this going to be needed in the next MWGRs?

@cecilecaillol if so, a backport to 11_2_X is needed in order to test it inv DQM Online at P5. Thanks

[boudoul]

Hello I have the impression that there is a mixture of code that would be good to have in MWGR but not everything. This is what I was asking at the ORP : what is intented to be used in the next MWGR , what is not . ... We may want to be careful and not backport in a production release a big thing while only a fraction is needed. But of course @silviodonato and @qliphy can decide. Anyhow the first thing to get is indeed a better description of the content.
@amassiro FYI

[cecilecaillol]

@cecilecaillol is this going to be needed in the next MWGRs?

@cecilecaillol if so, a backport to 11_2_X is needed in order to test it inv DQM Online at P5. Thanks

We do not need anything back-ported to 11_2_X. Everything necessary for MWGR was PRed individually before.

[jfernan2]

+1

[rekovic]

+1

[cmsbuild]

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)

[qliphy]

+1