Add check on PATLeptonTimeLifeInfoProducer closestState valid state #44864
Conversation
|
urgent |
|
please test |
|
cms-bot internal usage |
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-44864/40118
|
|
A new Pull Request was created by @francescobrivio for master. It involves the following packages:
@vlimant, @hqucms, @jfernan2, @mandrenguyen can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
| @@ -169,6 +170,10 @@ void PATLeptonTimeLifeInfoProducer<T>::produceAndFillIPInfo(const T& lepton, | |||
| AnalyticalImpactPointExtrapolator extrapolator(transTrack.field()); | |||
| TrajectoryStateOnSurface closestState = | |||
| extrapolator.extrapolate(transTrack.impactPointState(), RecoVertex::convertPos(pv.position())); | |||
| if (!closestState.isValid()) { | |||
| edm::LogError("PATLeptonTimeLifeInfoProducer") << "closestState not valid!"; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
please also print transTrack.impactPointState() and RecoVertex::convertPos(pv.position())
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks Slava for the suggestion, I force-pushed a new commit including the printout of the two values.
The code it's a bit uglier (enforced by code-format), but the output looks nicer anyway!
Testing on the crashing event I get:
%MSG-e PATLeptonTimeLifeInfoProducer: PATElectronTimeLifeInfoProducer:electronTimeLifeInfos 29-Apr-2024 18:32:43 CEST Run: 369998 Event: 31680062
closestState not valid! From:
transTrack.impactPointState():
global parameters
x = 1.91865 34.2722 166.593
p = -0.016365 0.000857716 0.0626035
global error
0.812786 0.00612206 -0.0855089 -0.0504526 0.0847113
0.00612206 0.00027459 -0.000491722 0.000820261 0.00174473
-0.0855089 -0.000491722 0.0124496 0.00858109 -0.0126903
-0.0504526 0.000820261 0.00858109 0.0129749 -0.00277318
0.0847113 0.00174473 -0.0126903 -0.00277318 0.0202798
local parameters (q/p,v',w',v,w)
-15.4529 0 -3.82022 0 -0
local error
0.812786 0.0291878 -0.0981561 0.0504526 -0.334519
0.0291878 0.00453957 0.0104463 0.00673732 0.00313124
-0.0981561 0.0104463 0.0685205 0.0127032 0.109981
0.0504526 0.00673732 0.0127032 0.0129749 -0.0109511
-0.334519 0.00313124 0.109981 -0.0109511 0.316245
Defined at beforeSurface
Magnetic field in inverse GeV: (1.92692e-06,3.442e-05,0.0112619)
RecoVertex::convertPos(pv.position()):
(0.117078,-0.182911,0.95493)
%MSG
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-e10e38/39152/summary.html Comparison SummaryThere are some workflows for which there are errors in the baseline: Summary:
|
francescobrivio
force-pushed
the
alca-closestState_check
branch
from
c150b8b to
36effa5
Compare
cmsbuild
added
tests-pending
code-checks-pending
and removed
tests-approved
code-checks-approved
labels
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-44864/40126
|
|
@cmsbuild please test |
|
enable nano |
|
please test |
|
type tau |
|
@cms-sw/tau-pog-l2 @mbluj Please have a look if the fix is OK to you. |
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-e10e38/39164/summary.html Comparison SummaryThere are some workflows for which there are errors in the baseline: Summary:
NANO Comparison SummarySummary:
Nano size comparison Summary:
|
|
+1 |
|
+orp
|
|
+1 |
cmsbuild
added
reconstruction-approved
fully-signed
and removed
reconstruction-pending
pending-signatures
labels
|
Please remove the RFC |
|
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 be automatically merged. |
francescobrivio
changed the title
PR description:
This PR addresses #44862 as suggested in #44862 (comment), in order to cure the crash observed in the CMSSW_14_0_6 replay (see CMSTalk).
It simply adds an
isValid()check to theclosestStateobject before accessing its members and emits anedm::LogErrorin case it's not valid.@cms-sw/tracking-pog-l2 @mbluj please advise if a better solution is needed to fix the issue at its root.
PR validation:
Code compiles.
Additionally, I re-run successfully on the crashing event following the recipe from #44862 (comment) and, as expected, I got:
but no crash.
Backport:
A 14_0_X backport is needed in order to be deployed in production in Tier0 (thus allowing deployment of 14_0_6_MULTIARCHS in HLT)
FYI @mandrenguyen @missirol