-
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
[14_0_X] Revert "Workaround to produce exactly same data products in Serial and CUDA backends in Alpaka modules possibly used at HLT" #45081
Conversation
…Serial and CUDA backends in Alpaka modules possibly used at HLT"
A new Pull Request was created by @makortel for CMSSW_14_0_X. It involves the following packages:
@fwyzard, @saumyaphor4252, @makortel, @jfernan2, @perrotta, @cmsbuild, @mandrenguyen, @consuegs can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
cms-bot internal usage |
enable gpu |
@cmsbuild, please test |
@antoniovilela , just to be sure, #45081 and #44978 will also go in CMSSW_14_0_X ... right? and once these PR are merged then we want to have CMSSW_14_0_7_HLT release (or please suggest a better name) which should have 14_0_7_patch1 + #45081 and #44978 ... right? |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df7e0f/39584/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 SummarySummary:
GPU Comparison SummarySummary:
|
I think we do not yet want to merge 44978 into 140X. It should first be tested and when we’re certain it is doing what’s intended, then we merge. |
@makortel @Dr15Jones @antoniovilela @rappoccio , both #45080 and #44892 are merged in 14.1.X and will be part of 11h00 IB today. By the way, do we need all archs for this test release or production arch (i.e. el8_amd64_gcc12) is enough? Do we a MULTIARCHS release too ? |
Thanks! |
Looks good to me. |
thanks @makortel . Note that #44978 is backport of #44892 which was integrated in today's 11h 14.1.X IB and one unit test failed . Is it safe to go ahead with CMSSW_14_0_7_HLTTest release ? |
Given the nature of the test, the failure is expected (#44892 (comment)). The test itself is brittle and will need an update.
Yes. Thanks! |
+heterogeneous |
+1 |
+alca
|
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_14_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_14_1_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @rappoccio, @antoniovilela, @sextonkennedy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description:
Reverts #44699, to be used in conjunction with #44978
PR validation:
None
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:
Backport of #45080