-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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-gex82 Add 2 new phase2 scenarios 2026D85 and 2026D86 #34481
Conversation
A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda (Sunanda Banerjee) for master. It involves the following packages:
@civanch, @Dr15Jones, @jordan-martins, @chayanit, @cvuosalo, @wajidalikhan, @ianna, @kpedro88, @cmsbuild, @makortel, @srimanob, @silviodonato, @mdhildreth, @kskovpen, @bbilin, @qliphy, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
* D78 = T22+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6 | ||
* D79 = T23+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6 | ||
* D80 = T25+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6 | ||
* D81 = T26+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6 | ||
* D82 = T21+C15+M9+I13+O7+F7 | ||
* D83 = T24+C16+M9+I13+O7+F6 | ||
* D84 = T24+C13+M7+I11+O6+F6 (For HGCAL study on evolution of HGCal replacing D70) | ||
* D85 = T24+C14+M9+I14+O7+F6 | ||
* D86 = T24+C17+M10+I14+O8+F6 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I understand this only now. I did not realize that T27 is put in till I submitted this PR. If #34120 is merged, I shall take proper action
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For D86, do you want to jump both Calorimeter and Muon, not one-by-one as we usually do?
@cmsbuild Please test |
The updated description of material in MTD scenario I14 as implemented by @martatornago has been presented in https://indico.cern.ch/event/1057473/contributions/4444289/attachments/2279146/3872237/ETLGeometryUpdate.pdf |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-02104d/16805/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
@cmsbuild Please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-02104d/16823/summary.html Comparison SummaryThe workflows 140.53 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons Summary:
|
@@ -94,11 +99,13 @@ Several detector combinations have been generated: | |||
* D68 = T21+C11+M6+I11+O5+F4 (For HGCAL study on evolution of detector) | |||
* D70 = T21+C13+M7+I11+O6+F6 (For HGCAL study on evolution of detector) | |||
* D76 = T21+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6 | |||
* D77 = T24+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6 | |||
* D77 = T24+C14+M9+I13+O7+F6 (Current default scenario) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do you mean by the current default scenario?
The default scenario is D76.
Of course, we can try to move to D77 where T24==T21 but DD4hep support.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It cannot be. D77 is identical to D76. While D77 can run with dd4hep, D76 does not.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I understand. I just say that the current geometry we used for relvals and short matrix test is D76. We can propose to move from 12_0_0_pre5.
Also C17, M10 and O8 go hand in hand. An improved muon version will come soon afterwards. |
assign mtd-dpg |
+Upgrade Note that I would like to get confirmation on moving from Tracker also as D85 are on both PRs. |
@fabiocos can you approve this PR? |
+1 the MTD update was provided by the DPG based on the updates by @martatornago , from the tests performed no overlap is observed in scenario D85 . A corresponding update of |
+mtd-dpg |
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, @perrotta (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
@silviodonato @qliphy @perrotta please check operations as well, my +1 approved (involuntarily) also that, although it looks ok to me (I had tried it already in my private test https://github.com/fabiocos/cmssw/tree/fc-etlv6 ) |
+1 |
PR description:
Add 2 new phase2 scenarios 2026D85 and 2026D86. This contains new definition of MTD (Fabio, Marta), HGCal and support structure for GE0
PR validation:
Tested with 2 new workflows: 38234.0 and 38634.0
if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
Nothing special