use --hltProcess reHLT in Run-3 Data RelVals
#39834
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
test parameters:
|
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-39834/32711
|
|
A new Pull Request was created by @missirol (Marino Missiroli) for master. It involves the following packages:
@bbilin, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @kskovpen, @sunilUIET can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
please test |
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-77bcc2/28469/summary.html Comparison SummaryThe workflows 140.036, 140.035, 140.034, 140.033, 140.032, 140.031, 140.02, 140.019, 140.018, 140.017, 140.016, 140.015, 140.005, 140.004, 140.003, 140.002, 140.001, 139.004, 139.003, 139.002, 139.001 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:
|
|
+Upgrade |
|
hold To be rebased onto the next IB, assuming #39755 is merged by then. |
|
Pull request has been put on hold by @missirol |
|
Hi @missirol |
|
I didn't think this was urgent, but PdmV should state their preference. In any case, I will rebase as soon as there is a viable IB. |
|
Thanks a lot @missirol . I think it should be fine to rebase after an IB. |
|
Pull request #39834 was updated. @bbilin, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @kskovpen, @sunilUIET can you please check and sign again. |
|
please test |
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-77bcc2/28509/summary.html Comparison SummaryThere are some workflows for which there are errors in the baseline: The workflows 140.069, 140.068, 140.067, 140.066, 140.065, 140.064, 140.063, 140.062, 140.051, 140.05, 140.049, 140.048, 140.047, 140.046, 140.045, 140.044, 140.043, 140.042, 140.031, 140.03, 140.029, 140.028, 140.027, 140.026, 140.025, 140.024, 140.023, 140.022, 140.021, 140.011, 140.01, 140.009, 140.008, 140.007, 140.006, 140.005, 140.004, 140.003, 140.002, 140.001, 139.004, 139.003, 139.002, 139.001 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:
|
This was referenced Oct 26, 2022
|
+Upgrade |
|
@cms-sw/pdmv-l2 , could you have a look at this PR, please? I'd like to avoid a 2nd rebase. |
|
+pdmv |
cmsbuild
added
fully-signed
pdmv-approved
and removed
pending-signatures
pdmv-pending
labels
|
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, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
|
Thanks @missirol |
|
+1 |
This was referenced Oct 28, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
resolves #39714
PR description:
This PR is an attempt to solve #39714 by updating the Run-3 Data RelVal wfs to use the HLT results from the (re)HLT step of a given wf (process name =
reHLT), rather than from the collections in wf's input files (process name =HLT). Minor renaming/refactoring of transient variables inrelval_stepsandrelval_standardwas done in the process.Changes can be expected in the outputs of the affected workflows, as this changes which HLT results are used by their post-HLT steps (e.g. PAT and DQM).
This PR will likely need to be rebased after #39755 is integrated.
To add
--hltProcess reHLTto the post-HLT step of the Run-3 data RelVals, the following is done:HLTDR3_2021toHLTDR3_2022;HLTRUN3withHLTDR3_2022(they are identical, making the first redundant);RECODR3_reHLT(="RECODR3 + --hltProcess=reHLT");RECODR3_2021withRECODR3_reHLT;RECONANORUN3toRECONANORUN3_reHLT, and base it off ofRECODR3_reHLT;RECOCOSMRUN3toRECOCOSMRUN3_reHLT.PR validation:
runTheMatrix.py -l 139.001,140.001,140.104passed.If this PR is a backport, please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported, please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:
Not a backport. Backports TBD by PdmV.