Update Phase2 MC GT to clean up unused Phase1 pixel conditions #42794

saumyaphor4252 · 2023-09-14T19:14:27Z

PR description:

This is a follow-up on cms-AlCaDB/AlCaTools#88.

With #42612 now merged, we have updated and cut the official versioned Phase2 GT 132X_mcRun4_realistic_v1 that removes the following currently unused Phase-1 pixel conditions:

Record	Label	131X_mcRun4_realistic_v6	132X_mcRun4_realistic_v1
SiPixelDynamicInefficiencyRcd	-	SiPixelDynamicInefficiency_13TeV_v3_mc	-
SiPixelFedCablingMapRcd	-	SiPixelFedCablingMap_mc	-
SiPixelGainCalibrationForHLTRcd	-	SiPixelGainCalibrationForHLT_split_smeared_mc	-
SiPixelGainCalibrationOfflineRcd	-	SiPixelGainCalibration_split_smeared_mc	-
SiPixelTemplateDBObjectRcd	0T	SiPixelTemplateDBObject_0T_v3_mc	-

The difference between the new GT from the last one is here:

https://cms-conddb.cern.ch/cmsDbBrowser/diff/Prod/gts/131X_mcRun4_realistic_v6/132X_mcRun4_realistic_v1

PR validation:

Successfully tested locally with runTheMatrix.py -l 22034.0, 23234.0, 24834.0 -j 8 --ibeos which consumes the auto:phase2_realistic key

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. Clean-up for future GTs, so no backport is expected so far.

cmsbuild · 2023-09-14T19:22:14Z

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-42794/36906

This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

cmsbuild · 2023-09-14T19:22:38Z

A new Pull Request was created by @saumyaphor4252 (Saumya Phor) for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/AlCa (alca)

@perrotta, @cmsbuild, @consuegs, @saumyaphor4252 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @mmusich, @fabiocos, @tocheng this is something you requested to watch as well.
@rappoccio, @antoniovilela, @sextonkennedy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

saumyaphor4252 · 2023-09-15T06:05:54Z

@cmsbuild, please test

cmsbuild · 2023-09-15T11:55:32Z

-1

Failed Tests: RelVals-INPUT
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d917f7/34771/summary.html
COMMIT: e4daf06
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_3_X_2023-09-14-2300/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/42794/34771/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

RelVals-INPUT

13434.013434.0_TTbar_14TeV+2021FSPU/step2_TTbar_14TeV+2021FSPU.log
14234.014234.0_TTbar_14TeV+2023FSPU/step2_TTbar_14TeV+2023FSPU.log
24834.024834.0_TTbar_14TeV+2026D98/step2_TTbar_14TeV+2026D98.log

Expand to see more relval errors ...

25034.114

Comparison Summary

Summary:

You potentially removed 4 lines from the logs
Reco comparison results: 8 differences found in the comparisons
DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 50
DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3348648
DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 6
DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3348620
DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 49 files compared)
Checked 214 log files, 167 edm output root files, 50 DQM output files
TriggerResults: no differences found

mmusich · 2023-09-15T12:07:02Z

13434.013434.0_TTbar_14TeV+2021FSPU/step2_TTbar_14TeV+2021FSPU.log

failures in run3 fast-sim look spurious...

mmusich · 2023-09-15T14:23:31Z

@cmsbuild, please test

let's try again

cmsbuild · 2023-09-15T17:10:52Z

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d917f7/34786/summary.html
COMMIT: e4daf06
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_3_X_2023-09-15-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/42794/34786/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

You potentially removed 1 lines from the logs
Reco comparison results: 8 differences found in the comparisons
DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 50
DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3348648
DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 6
DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3348620
DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 49 files compared)
Checked 214 log files, 167 edm output root files, 50 DQM output files
TriggerResults: no differences found

saumyaphor4252 · 2023-09-16T14:18:16Z

+alca

results clean now
only diffs in msg Logger

cmsbuild · 2023-09-16T14:18:40Z

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. @rappoccio, @antoniovilela, @sextonkennedy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

makortel · 2023-09-19T13:54:24Z

Did this PR cause Alignment/OfflineValidation unit test to fail?

----- Begin Fatal Exception 19-Sep-2023 13:41:57 CEST-----------------------
An exception of category 'NoRecord' occurred while
   [0] Processing global begin Run run: 1
   [1] Calling method for module GeneralPurposeTrackAnalyzer/'trackanalysis'
Exception Message:
No "SiPixelFedCablingMapRcd" record found in the EventSetup.

 Please add an ESSource or ESProducer that delivers such a record.
----- End Fatal Exception -------------------------------------------------

https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/cgi-bin/logreader/el8_amd64_gcc11/CMSSW_13_3_X_2023-09-19-1100/unitTestLogs/Alignment/OfflineValidation#/2510-2510

kpedro88 · 2023-09-19T20:18:16Z

Another test CondTools/RunInfo/test/CondToolsLHCInfoNewPopConTest is also failing:

===== Test "CondToolsLHCInfoNewPopConTest" ====
testing LHCInfoPerFillPopConAnalyzer in EndFill mode for startTime="2022-10-24 01:00:00.000" endTime="2022-10-24 20:00:00.000"
testing LHCInfoPerLSPopConAnalyzer in endFill mode for startTime="2022-10-24 01:00:00.000" endTime="2022-10-24 20:00:00.000"
testing LHCInfoPerLSPopConAnalyzer in endFill mode for startTime="2022-07-11 22:00:00.000" endTime="2022-07-12 18:10:10.000"
Failure LHCInfoPerLSPopConAnalyzer in endFill mode written wrong number of payloads: Expected 69, but got 70: status 1

---> test CondToolsLHCInfoNewPopConTest had ERRORS
TestTime:34
^^^^ End Test CondToolsLHCInfoNewPopConTest ^^^^

https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/cgi-bin/logreader/el8_amd64_gcc11/CMSSW_13_3_X_2023-09-19-1100/unitTestLogs/CondTools/RunInfo#/2

mmusich · 2023-09-19T20:33:14Z

Another test CondTools/RunInfo/test/CondToolsLHCInfoNewPopConTest is also failing:

I fail to see how can that be related (i.e. why it should use a Phase-2 GT, the only thing changed here...)

makortel · 2023-09-19T20:36:02Z

Another test CondTools/RunInfo/test/CondToolsLHCInfoNewPopConTest is also failing:

I fail to see how can that be related (i.e. why it should use a Phase-2 GT, the only thing changed here...)

That test was also failing before this PR was merged.

mmusich · 2023-09-19T20:36:30Z

That test was also failing before this PR was merged.

that makes more sense. Thank you.

mmusich · 2023-09-19T20:52:32Z

Did this PR cause Alignment/OfflineValidation unit test to fail?

hopefully #42826 should fix the unit tests failures.

mmusich · 2023-09-20T06:07:54Z

in addition there are three failing relval workflows in IB: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/html/cmssdt-ib/#/relVal/CMSSW_13_3/2023-09-19-2300?selectedArchs=el8_amd64_gcc11&selectedFlavors=X&selectedStatus=failed:

20834.501
20834.502
24834.5

All failing with:

----- Begin Fatal Exception 20-Sep-2023 06:37:25 CEST-----------------------
An exception of category 'NoRecord' occurred while
   [0] Processing  Event run: 1 lumi: 64 event: 6303 stream: 2
   [1] Running path 'RECOSIMoutput_step'
   [2] Prefetching for module PoolOutputModule/'RECOSIMoutput'
   [3] Calling method for module SiPixelRawToDigi/'siPixelDigis@cpu'
Exception Message:
No "SiPixelFedCablingMapRcd" record found in the EventSetup.

 Please add an ESSource or ESProducer that delivers such a record.
----- End Fatal Exception -------------------------------------------------

perrotta · 2023-09-20T07:58:23Z

in addition there are three failing relval workflows in IB: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/html/cmssdt-ib/#/relVal/CMSSW_13_3/2023-09-19-2300?selectedArchs=el8_amd64_gcc11&selectedFlavors=X&selectedStatus=failed:

20834.501
20834.502
24834.5

All failing with:

----- Begin Fatal Exception 20-Sep-2023 06:37:25 CEST-----------------------
An exception of category 'NoRecord' occurred while
   [0] Processing  Event run: 1 lumi: 64 event: 6303 stream: 2
   [1] Running path 'RECOSIMoutput_step'
   [2] Prefetching for module PoolOutputModule/'RECOSIMoutput'
   [3] Calling method for module SiPixelRawToDigi/'siPixelDigis@cpu'
Exception Message:
No "SiPixelFedCablingMapRcd" record found in the EventSetup.

 Please add an ESSource or ESProducer that delivers such a record.
----- End Fatal Exception -------------------------------------------------

Uhm, weird...
@mmusich do you have already a fix in mind also for SiPixelRawToDigi (for example adding a UsePhase2 flag in analogy to UsePhase1, or replace the bool by an integer phase...). Or do you suggest to put back the SiPixelFedCablingMapRcd in the Phase2 GTs, instead?

mmusich · 2023-09-20T07:59:45Z

do you have already a fix in mind also for SiPixelRawToDigi

we definitely should NOT run the phase-1 Pixel RawToDigi in a Phase-2 workflow. runTheMatrix should be patched in order to not run the pixel unpacker in phase2.

kpedro88 · 2023-09-20T08:07:06Z

runTheMatrix is just executing the workflows as they're written. Perhaps something in https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/SimGeneral/MixingModule/python/pixelDigitizer_cfi.py or https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/SimGeneral/MixingModule/python/SiPixelSimParameters_cfi.py needs to be changed for phase 1 vs. phase 2 (using appropriate Eras). Probably worth posting a dedicated issue for this.

mmusich · 2023-09-20T08:10:18Z

@kpedro88

the unpacker has absolutely nothing to do with simulation (as you seem to imply, which I find quite worrisome). It's actually used in reconstruction.
In any case this is the line forcing to run the phase-1 unpacker:

cmssw/Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/upgradeWorkflowComponents.py

Lines 399 to 403 in df70e9e

    
           upgradeWFs['pixelTrackingOnly'].step3 = { 
        
               '-s': 'RAW2DIGI:RawToDigi_pixelOnly,RECO:reconstruction_pixelTrackingOnly,VALIDATION:@pixelTrackingOnlyValidation,DQM:@pixelTrackingOnlyDQM', 
        
               '--datatier': 'GEN-SIM-RECO,DQMIO', 
        
               '--eventcontent': 'RECOSIM,DQM', 
        
           }

the issue is in runTheMatrix and nowhere else!

kpedro88 · 2023-09-20T08:12:05Z

Apologies, I just misread the comment. Indeed, pixel RawToDigi is already excluded in

cmssw/Configuration/StandardSequences/python/RawToDigi_cff.py

Lines 89 to 92 in df70e9e

    
           from Configuration.Eras.Modifier_phase2_tracker_cff import phase2_tracker 
        
           # Remove siPixelDigis until we have phase2 pixel digis 
        
           # No Strips in the Phase-2 tracker 
        
           phase2_tracker.toReplaceWith(RawToDigiTask, RawToDigiTask.copyAndExclude([siPixelDigis,siStripDigis])) # FIXME

from standard workflows, but apparently not the special workflow as you point out.

mmusich · 2023-09-20T08:14:23Z

I guess we could make this line

cmssw/Configuration/StandardSequences/python/RawToDigi_cff.py

Line 68 in df70e9e

RawToDigi_pixelOnly = cms.Sequence(RawToDigiTask_pixelOnly)

an empty sequence with an era modifier (waiting to have a real phase-2 pixel unpacker)

kpedro88 · 2023-09-20T08:16:54Z

Yes, I'm just now preparing a PR with that change.

perrotta · 2023-09-20T08:51:58Z

@mmusich what about adding a line

phase2_tracker.toReplaceWith(siPixelDigisTask, cms.Task())

in EventFilter/SiPixelRawToDigi/python/siPixelDigis_cff.py?

It seems to me the right place where to apply the modification, and easier to revert when we'll have a real phase-2 pixel unpacker.

By the way, I checked that it actually fixes the now failing workflows

mmusich · 2023-09-20T08:53:25Z

@perrotta

that about adding a line

isn't this exactly what I suggested at: #42794 (comment)

By the way, I checked that it actually fixes the now failing workflows

also, I am afraid it does not...

perrotta · 2023-09-20T08:59:46Z

@perrotta

that about adding a line

isn't this exactly what I suggested at: #42794 (comment)

Well, you were suggesting to replace it in Configuration/StandardSequences/python/RawToDigi_cff.py, I am suggesting instead to modify it directly in siPixelDigis_cff.py

By the way, I checked that it actually fixes the now failing workflows

also, I am afraid it does not...

I succesfully run step3 of wf 24834.5 with it...

mmusich · 2023-09-20T09:00:52Z

I succesfully run step3 of wf 24834.5 with it...

try the ones with the gpu modifier.... :D

mmusich · 2023-09-20T09:07:11Z

for the record, #42830 solves. We can discuss if we instead we want to go #42794 (comment) (I need to ponder a bit pros and cons)

kpedro88 · 2023-09-20T09:18:35Z

I think the advantage of #42794 (comment) is that it avoids the need to remove siPixelDigis with phase2_tracker.toReplaceWith(... in two different places in RawToDigi_cff.py. One could also turn siStripDigis into a Task and then the phase2_tracker.toReplaceWith(... could be removed entirely from RawToDigi_cff.py.

perrotta · 2023-09-20T09:41:14Z

One could also turn siStripDigis into a Task and then the phase2_tracker.toReplaceWith(... could be removed entirely from RawToDigi_cff.py.

Well, for siStrip the situation is different: it will not be there in Phase 2.

I would suggest to empty the siPixelDigisTask in siPixelDigis_cff.py (with the intent to have it back in at some time) but keep removing the siStripDigis from RawToDigi_cff.py, as it is done now, because they are not supposed to get back.

mmusich · 2023-09-20T09:55:53Z

Well, for siStrip the situation is different: it will not be there in Phase 2.

I agree with this assessment, that's why I originally remove it from the raw2digi in 1647c50

I would suggest to empty the siPixelDigisTask in siPixelDigis_cff.py (with the intent to have it back in at some time) but keep removing the siStripDigis from RawToDigi_cff.py, as it is done now, because they are not supposed to get back.

I couldn't think of adverse effects, hence that's what's currently implemented in #42830

Update Phase-2 MC GT

e4daf06

cmsbuild added this to the CMSSW_13_3_X milestone Sep 14, 2023

cmsbuild added alca-pending pending-signatures tests-pending orp-pending code-checks-pending labels Sep 14, 2023

cmsbuild added code-checks-approved and removed code-checks-pending labels Sep 14, 2023

cmsbuild added tests-started and removed tests-pending labels Sep 15, 2023

cmsbuild added tests-rejected and removed tests-started labels Sep 15, 2023

cmsbuild added tests-started and removed tests-rejected labels Sep 15, 2023

cmsbuild added tests-approved and removed tests-started labels Sep 15, 2023

cmsbuild added alca-approved fully-signed and removed alca-pending pending-signatures labels Sep 16, 2023

mmusich mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2023

Clean unused Phase-1 Pixel conditions in the Phase-2 autoCond key. cms-AlCaDB/AlCaTools#88

Closed

cmsbuild mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2023

Include 4 Hits Seeds in Phase2 HLT Menu #42820

Closed

This was referenced Sep 19, 2023

Improve command-line argument support for Python configs in cmsRun and edm tools #42650

Merged

Fix usage of sys.argv in cmsRun configs #42823

Merged

mmusich mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2023

fix GeneralPurposeTrackAnalyzer in the phase-2 case, due to missing conditions #42826

Merged

mmusich mentioned this pull request Sep 20, 2023

minimal fixes to run Phase2 patatrack pixel only workflows without using phase-1 pixel conditions #42830

Merged

saumyaphor4252 deleted the alca_Update_Phase2_GT branch October 13, 2023 15:05

mmusich mentioned this pull request Oct 20, 2023

Long startup time for simplest workflows #43062

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Update Phase2 MC GT to clean up unused Phase1 pixel conditions #42794

Update Phase2 MC GT to clean up unused Phase1 pixel conditions #42794

saumyaphor4252 commented Sep 14, 2023

cmsbuild commented Sep 14, 2023

cmsbuild commented Sep 14, 2023

saumyaphor4252 commented Sep 15, 2023

cmsbuild commented Sep 15, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 15, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 15, 2023

cmsbuild commented Sep 15, 2023

saumyaphor4252 commented Sep 16, 2023

cmsbuild commented Sep 16, 2023

makortel commented Sep 19, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 19, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 19, 2023

makortel commented Sep 19, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 19, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 19, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

perrotta commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 20, 2023

perrotta commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

perrotta commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 20, 2023

perrotta commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

Update Phase2 MC GT to clean up unused Phase1 pixel conditions #42794

Update Phase2 MC GT to clean up unused Phase1 pixel conditions #42794

Conversation

saumyaphor4252 commented Sep 14, 2023

PR description:

PR validation:

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:

cmsbuild commented Sep 14, 2023

cmsbuild commented Sep 14, 2023

saumyaphor4252 commented Sep 15, 2023

cmsbuild commented Sep 15, 2023

RelVals-INPUT

Comparison Summary

mmusich commented Sep 15, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 15, 2023

cmsbuild commented Sep 15, 2023

Comparison Summary

saumyaphor4252 commented Sep 16, 2023

cmsbuild commented Sep 16, 2023

makortel commented Sep 19, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 19, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 19, 2023

makortel commented Sep 19, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 19, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 19, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

perrotta commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 20, 2023

perrotta commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

perrotta commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023

kpedro88 commented Sep 20, 2023

perrotta commented Sep 20, 2023

mmusich commented Sep 20, 2023