-
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
fix undefined behavior in MultiTrackValidator
#35086
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35086/24966
|
A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for master. It involves the following packages:
@andrius-k, @kmaeshima, @ErnestaP, @ahmad3213, @cmsbuild, @jfernan2, @rvenditti can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
please test |
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d54118/18156/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
@mrodozov I don't see the output of wf 11603 in the logs. |
11603 will be available only for the second test and the bot will comment with another link for it, |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d54118/18157/summary.html The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic:
You can see more details here: Comparison Summary@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Summary:
|
please test Trying to get a clean comparison environment |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d54118/18347/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 @slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Summary:
|
@jfernan2 please hold this one: I have still to address #35037 (comment) |
ec0f51a
to
d7af8e6
Compare
for the comparison I'll suggest to run it against the default IB. |
test parameters: |
please test |
@jfernan2 the last two instructions should test against the default build (I hope) |
please test |
I removed the prev test params, so yes it should start against the default |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d54118/18600/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:
|
+1 |
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. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description:
Aim of this PR is to fix the undefined behavior reported at #35037.
When the input track collection is empty, just return instead of creating arrays of size 0.
PR validation:
Run workflow 11603.0 with this branch on top of
CMSSW_12_1_UBSAN_X_2021-08-27-2300
and didn't observe runtime errors linked toMultiTrackValidator
.if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
N/A
Cc:
@vberta @mtosi FYI