-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
Porting HLT Phase 2 simplified menu to 12_4_X #37162
Conversation
Porting HLT Phase 2 simplified menu, 12_3_0_pre5 fixes Porting HLT Phase 2 simplified menu, 12_3_0_pre5 fixes part 2 Adapt HLT Phase 2 menu to 36983
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-37162/28723
|
A new Pull Request was created by @trtomei (Thiago Tomei) for master. It involves the following packages:
@cmsbuild, @missirol, @Martin-Grunewald can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
I think this one supersedes #35342 |
Forgot to explicitly add the new parameter here.
Set MTD timing usage to false.
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-37162/28725
|
Pull request #37162 was updated. @cmsbuild, @missirol, @Martin-Grunewald can you please check and sign again. |
please test with #37158 Starting the tests even though the new code is not run anywhere. Running "with" the related PR just to include the label
Does this mean that the goal is to have this PR (and #37158) integrated before the latest 12_3_X pre-release is opened (i.e. as soon as tomorrow, possibly)? Would there be an issue with having these config files only in |
Hi Marino, Ideally, we would like to have this in 12_3_X, for the production! The key is that, since this code doesn't actually run anywhere yet (i.e. is not part of any workflow), we could use the one month until the release of CMSSW_12_3_0 to set up a workflow + RelVal, get it all working, and run this as "the HLT menu" for our production. At least that is the plan... |
Okay, thanks. As soon as the last pre-release of 12_3_X is opened (possibly tomorrow), this PR to |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-260256/22916/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
Pull request #37162 was updated. @cmsbuild, @missirol, @Martin-Grunewald can you please check and sign again. |
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-260256/23948/summary.html Comparison Summary@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Summary:
|
Look nice, the workflow |
+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) |
This PR is ready to be integrated, but it should be merged together (i.e. same IB) with #37324, which is not fully-signed yet. If I understand correctly, the goal is to (1) merge both in This PR and #37324 are not really urgent for @srimanob , what do you think? |
Hi @missirol Thanks. I just sign the #37324 and ping PdmV to check and to sign again. For production, as discussion happens last week, we will not need a backport. We will make sample with 12_3 and rerun any combination, HLT-only or L1(emulation)+HLT as preferred in 12_4. If run locally, pre-release is fine to use. This is to avoid a big backport to 12_3. |
urgent
"urgent" is just to signal that this PR now targets integration in
Ah, okay, I didn't know. So, no need for backports. Thanks, @srimanob. |
+1 |
The Phase-2 HLT workflow is running in IB since CMSSW_12_4_X_2022-04-20-1100 |
PR description:
This implements the Simplified Menu from the Phase-2 DAQ-HLT-TDR in CMSSW_12_4_X
PR validation:
As of now, this new menu (eventsetup, modules, tasks, paths, etc.) is not yet used anywhere, so it's impossible for this to actually change anything.
There is now a related PR to test this menu in PR tests, RelVals, and IBs (#37324). For the time being, we have to manually test.
This test works: