Skip to content
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

Updating EGM HLT supercluster regression tags for Run 3 in MC #37588

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 19, 2022

Conversation

tvami
Copy link
Contributor

@tvami tvami commented Apr 15, 2022

PR description:

Follow-up to #37491

Request to update tags is in
https://cms-talk.web.cern.ch/t/mc-gt-updating-egm-hlt-supercluster-regression-tags-for-run-3-in-mc/9343

Adding the EGM HLT supercluster regression tags for Run 3 in MC:

Diffs in the tags are according to the request:

Tag: pfscecal_EBCorrection_online_Run3_120X_v1_mc
Rcd: GBRDWrapperRcd
Label: pfscecal_EBCorrection_online

Tag: pfscecal_EECorrection_online_Run3_120X_v1_mc
Rcd: GBRDWrapperRcd
Label: pfscecal_EECorrection_online

Tag: pfscecal_EBUncertainty_online_Run3_120X_v1_mc
Rcd: GBRDWrapperRcd
Label: pfscecal_EBUncertainty_online

Tag: pfscecal_EEUncertainty_online_Run3_120X_v1_mc
Rcd: GBRDWrapperRcd
Label: pfscecal_EEUncertainty_online

PR validation:

test parameters:

  • workflows = 12034.0,11634.0,7.23,159.0,12434.0,12834.0

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

Backport to 12_3_X is expected

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor Author

tvami commented Apr 15, 2022

test parameters:

  • workflows = 12034.0,11634.0,7.23,159.0,12434.0,12834.0

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor Author

tvami commented Apr 15, 2022

assign hlt

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor Author

tvami commented Apr 15, 2022

@cmsbuild , please test

@missirol
Copy link
Contributor

@tvami , to follow the strategy proposed by EGM, the flag also needs to be updated here:

desc.add<bool>("regTrainedWithPS", false);

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-37588/29343

  • This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

  • There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

New categories assigned: hlt

@missirol,@Martin-Grunewald you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @tvami (Tamas Vami) for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • Configuration/AlCa (alca)
  • RecoEcal/EgammaClusterAlgos (reconstruction)

@malbouis, @yuanchao, @clacaputo, @Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @slava77, @jpata, @tvami, @francescobrivio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Sam-Harper, @rchatter, @jainshilpi, @valsdav, @tocheng, @lgray, @Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @sobhatta, @fabiocos, @thomreis, @afiqaize, @simonepigazzini, @wrtabb, @mmusich, @argiro, @varuns23, @ram1123 this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor Author

tvami commented Apr 15, 2022

Hi @missirol following up on our conversation in #37557 (comment)

Let me actually ask this about MC, because it's still not clear to me. If somebody wants to simulate Run-2 MC in 12_4_X now, and they'll go through the HLT step in their simulations, then by using 9548c78 they'll assume that that the Run-2 GT has conditions that are trained with PS, right? But that's not the case, given what the payloads in this PR were created only for Run-3 alone. Is the answer to this just that that a given CMSSW should be used for a given year, and so never use 12_4_X for Run-2 simulations (unless it's the TSG and they know what they are doing)

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor Author

tvami commented Apr 15, 2022

@cmsbuild , please abort

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor Author

tvami commented Apr 15, 2022

@cmsbuild , please test

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor Author

tvami commented Apr 15, 2022

@tvami , to follow the strategy proposed by EGM, the flag also needs to be updated here:

desc.add<bool>("regTrainedWithPS", false);

Thanks, I changed that in a2c4db2

I can squash the commits into one after we agreed that changing the flag in the cpp is indeed the best way forward (as opposed to doing it in the HLT menu)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-37588/29346

  • This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

  • There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #37588 was updated. @malbouis, @yuanchao, @clacaputo, @cmsbuild, @missirol, @Martin-Grunewald, @slava77, @jpata, @tvami, @francescobrivio can you please check and sign again.

@malbouis
Copy link
Contributor

+alca

  • EGM HLT supercluster regression for MC GTs.
  • switch of flag in EGM code to True. From now on the PS correction will be included.
  • failures in integration tests are understood.

@missirol
Copy link
Contributor

+hlt

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1

Failed Tests: UnitTests
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b85a3e/23987/summary.html
COMMIT: 1753394
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_4_X_2022-04-18-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/37588/23987/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Unit Tests

I found errors in the following unit tests:

---> test TestDQMOnlineClient-l1tstage2_dqm_sourceclient had ERRORS

Comparison Summary

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

  • /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-b85a3e/12034.0_TTbar_14TeV+2021Design+TTbar_14TeV_TuneCP5_GenSim+Digi+RecoNano+HARVESTNano
  • /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-b85a3e/7.23_Cosmics_UP21+Cosmics_UP21+DIGICOS_UP21+RECOCOS_UP21+ALCACOS_UP21+HARVESTCOS_UP21

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 52
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 4064379
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1515
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 4062842
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 51 files compared)
  • Checked 219 log files, 45 edm output root files, 52 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: found differences in 6 / 51 workflows

@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

+reconstruction

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (but tests are reportedly failing). 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)

@qliphy
Copy link
Contributor

qliphy commented Apr 19, 2022

merge

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants