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

[Phase-2] Validation of Phase-2 HLT paths and high level objects #44761

Open
SohamBhattacharya opened this issue Apr 17, 2024 · 6 comments
Open

Comments

@SohamBhattacharya
Copy link
Contributor

Currently there is no proper DQM for the Phase-2 HLT paths and high level objects (objects that are used to build the paths -- leptons, jets, etc.).
A tool (developed by @Sam-Harper and @finnlabe) already exists in CMSSW to do so. This has been used privately by some POGs, but not used centrally, afaik.
However, the tool should be hooked to jenkins so that it can be triggered for Phase-2 HLT workflows.
That will help us monitor the impact of any PR can potentially impact Phase-2 HLT.

The first step would be to have a config for the aforementioned tool with the Phase-2 HLT paths, for which I will be opening a PR very soon.
I am raising this issue to discuss how to best proceed after that.

Tagging @rovere

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 17, 2024

cms-bot internal usage

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Issue was created by @SohamBhattacharya.

@Dr15Jones, @makortel, @smuzaffar, @sextonkennedy, @antoniovilela, @rappoccio can you please review it and eventually sign/assign? Thanks.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Apr 17, 2024

assign hlt, dqm, upgrade

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

New categories assigned: hlt,dqm

@Martin-Grunewald,@mmusich,@rvenditti,@syuvivida,@tjavaid,@nothingface0,@antoniovagnerini you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

New categories assigned: upgrade

@srimanob,@subirsarkar you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks

@SohamBhattacharya
Copy link
Contributor Author

SohamBhattacharya commented Apr 22, 2024

With #44776 almost ready, we should move towards adding this to regular release validation configurations (as @mmusich also commented).
I can take a look at doing so, but I'll need some pointers as to which configurations need to be changed.

N.B. @Sam-Harper is working on a few fixes to the tool -- eta for that PR is end of the week.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants