-
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
[13.0.X] fix assignment of PVValHelper::phase
in PrimaryVertexValidation
#42205
Conversation
type bug-fix |
please test |
A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for CMSSW_13_0_X. It involves the following packages:
@perrotta, @consuegs, @saumyaphor4252, @tvami, @francescobrivio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-26e521/33573/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+alca
|
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_13_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_13_2_X is complete. 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) |
@tvami which log? Which lines? And why not in the master version of this PR, see #42203 (comment)? |
I don't think this PR can be responsible for any large change in the logs. The warning that I promoted to exception appears to be random as it was triggered by an uninitialized variable, therefore it might or might not have been present in the logs (but it is just one printout per job in some unit tests). |
Well, the size of the step3 log of wf 136.793 (e.g.) here in 13_0_X changes from 495 k in the baseline to 289 k with this PR. One must notice that in the master all those warnings had already disappeared, and the size of those step3 logs is a (much cleaner) 19k. |
Nothing of this can come from this PR, if you are concerned open a separate issue. Otherwise please merge (after master is signed)! |
I have no concerns, I just wanted to understand the message left here by @tvami |
hi Andrea, I prob misunderstood where the warnings that Marco removed will show up. We should be all good with this PR. Thanks! |
+1 |
backport of #42203
PR description:
Minor fix, to avoid having randomly assigned values of the
phase_
variable at runtime. Also instead of emitting a warning, throw in case thephase_
is not defined properly.PR validation:
Private checks.
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:
Verbatim backport of #42203 for data analysis purposes.