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

PPS full sim specific files only (second part of the splited PR 24420) #24545

Closed
wants to merge 22 commits into from

Conversation

mundim
Copy link
Contributor

@mundim mundim commented Sep 14, 2018

PPS full simulation code, with new SD for the tracker and timing detectors. It depends on the ongoing PR 24490 (PPSTools and new SimTransport with realistic optics parameterization from TOTEM).

@fabferro @disonjd @jan-kaspar @nminafra @setesami @forthommel @grzanka @nogima

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-24545/6422

Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying a patch in https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-24545/6422/git-diff.patch
e.g. curl https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-24545/6422/git-diff.patch | patch -p1

You can run scram build code-checks to apply code checks directly

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @mundim for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/Geometry
EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi
FastSimulation/CTPPSFastTrackingProducer
FastSimulation/CTPPSRecHitProducer
FastSimulation/CTPPSSimHitProducer
Geometry/CMSCommonData
Geometry/VeryForwardData
Geometry/VeryForwardGeometry
IOMC/ParticleGuns
PPSTools/Utilities
SimG4CMS/PPS
SimGeneral/MixingModule
SimPPS/Configuration
SimPPS/PPSPixelDigiProducer
SimPPS/PPSSimTrackProducer
SimPPS/RPDigiProducer
SimTransport/HectorProducer
SimTransport/PPSProtonTransport
SimTransport/TotemRPProtonTransportParametrization

The following packages do not have a category, yet:

PPSTools/Utilities
SimG4CMS/PPS
SimPPS/Configuration
SimPPS/PPSPixelDigiProducer
SimPPS/PPSSimTrackProducer
SimPPS/RPDigiProducer
SimTransport/PPSProtonTransport
SimTransport/TotemRPProtonTransportParametrization
Please create a PR for https://github.com/cms-sw/cms-bot/blob/master/categories_map.py to assign category

@perrotta, @efeyazgan, @Dr15Jones, @lveldere, @cvuosalo, @civanch, @perrozzi, @ssekmen, @mdhildreth, @ianna, @cmsbuild, @kpedro88, @slava77, @alberto-sanchez, @qliphy can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald, @matt-komm, @forthommel, @jan-kaspar, @makortel this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@civanch
Copy link
Contributor

civanch commented Sep 15, 2018

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Sep 15, 2018

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/30431/console Started: 2018/09/15 16:52

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1

Tested at: 4c084b3

You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-24545/30431/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: Build ClangBuild

  • Build:

I found an error when building:

>> Compiling edm plugin /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi/plugins/CTPPSPixelDigiToRaw.cc 
>> Compiling edm plugin /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi/plugins/TotemTriggerRawToDigi.cc 
>> Compiling edm plugin /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi/plugins/CTPPSTotemDigiToRaw.cc 
>> Compiling edm plugin /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi/plugins/TotemVFATRawToDigi.cc 
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi/plugins/CTPPSPixelDigiToRaw.cc: In member function 'virtual void CTPPSPixelDigiToRaw::produce(edm::Event&, const edm::EventSetup&)':
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi/plugins/CTPPSPixelDigiToRaw.cc:143:28: error: 'Digis' is not a member of 'CTPPSPixelDataFormatter'
   CTPPSPixelDataFormatter::Digis digis;
                            ^~~~~
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi/plugins/CTPPSPixelDigiToRaw.cc:149:5: error: 'digis' was not declared in this scope
     digis[ di->id] = di->data;
     ^~~~~

  • Clang:

I found a compilation error while trying to compile with clang:
I used this command:
scram b vclean && USER_CXXFLAGS='-Wno-register -fsyntax-only' scram build -k -j 16 COMPILER='llvm compile'

>> Compiling  /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/SimPPS/PPSPixelDigiProducer/src/RPixHitChargeConverter.cc 
>> Compiling  /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/SimPPS/PPSPixelDigiProducer/src/PPSPixelDigiAnalyzer.cc 
>> Compiling  /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/SimPPS/PPSPixelDigiProducer/src/RPixLinearChargeDivider.cc 
>> Compiling  /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/SimPPS/PPSPixelDigiProducer/src/RPixLinearChargeCollectionDrifter.cc 
>> Compiling edm plugin /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/SimPPS/RPDigiProducer/src/RPDigiProducer.cc 
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi/src/CTPPSTotemDataFormatter.cc:90:55: error: 'calculateCRC' is a private member of 'VFATFrame'
                for (int i = 11; i >= 1; i--)  crc_fin = VFATFrame::calculateCRC(crc_fin,bufCRC[i]);
                                                                    ^
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_3_X_2018-09-15-1100/src/EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi/interface/VFATFrame.h:191:17: note: declared private here
    static word calculateCRC(word crc_in, word dato);
                ^


@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison not run due to Build errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 15, 2018

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/31025/console Started: 2018/10/15 10:48

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1

Tested at: c8c26ac

You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-24545/31025/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: Build ClangBuild

  • Build:

I found compilation warning when building: See details on the summary page.

  • Clang:

I found compilation warning while trying to compile with clang. Command used:

USER_CUDA_FLAGS='--expt-relaxed-constexpr' USER_CXXFLAGS='-Wno-register -fsyntax-only' scram build -k -j 16 COMPILER='llvm compile'

See details on the summary page.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison not run due to Build errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped)

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

I've just launched the tests for this PR.

However, I see that (for example) Utilities/PPS/bin/PPSOpticsCalibration.cc is called (more correctly) Utilities/PPS/bin/PPSOpticsCalibrator.cc in #24490. Clearly the two PRs are not kept synchronized (as they should): therefore, they must at least follow some order, and they must be evaluated and merged by strictly following that order.

@mundim please provide us with a map that explains:

Once any of them is merged, the other one(s) should get rebased: evaluating those pull requests before they being rebased is a waste of time, since it is evident that they are not kept synchronized and unavoidably they will eventually become different.

Please provide a clear plan as a comment (and also in the description part at the top) in this pull request, in #24490, and in all other possible affected PR: I cannot continue the review till then.

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

The build errors are:

/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_4_X_2018-10-14-2300/src/SimPPS/PPSPixelDigiProducer/interface/PPSPixelDigiProducer.h:69:20: warning: 'CTPPSPixelDigiProducer::beginRun' hides overloaded virtual function [-Woverloaded-virtual]
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_4_X_2018-10-14-2300/src/SimPPS/RPDigiProducer/interface/RPDigiProducer.h:52:20: warning: 'RPDigiProducer::beginRun' hides overloaded virtual function [-Woverloaded-virtual]
/build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/ib-any-integration/CMSSW_10_4_X_2018-10-14-2300/src/SimTransport/PPSProtonTransport/src/HectorTransport.cc:96:18: warning: explicitly assigning value of variable of type 'double' to itself [-Wself-assign]

One of these seems to be the same as a warning seen in #24490.

There is also a code rule violation:

Rule3 : https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cms-sw/cmssw/master/Utilities/ReleaseScripts/python/cmsCodeRules/config.py
Search for "catch(...)" statements in *.cc, *.cxx files

/SimPPS/RPDigiProducer/src/RPDisplacementGenerator.cc
[31]

@mundim
Copy link
Contributor Author

mundim commented Oct 17, 2018

I've just launched the tests for this PR.

However, I see that (for example) Utilities/PPS/bin/PPSOpticsCalibration.cc is called (more correctly) Utilities/PPS/bin/PPSOpticsCalibrator.cc in #24490. Clearly the two PRs are not kept synchronized (as they should): therefore, they must at least follow some order, and they must be evaluated and merged by strictly following that order.

@mundim please provide us with a map that explains:

* Which are the daughter PR of the original #24420? Only this one and #24490

Yes.

* In which order they should be evaluated, and therefore merged?

The PR 24490 should go first.

Once any of them is merged, the other one(s) should get rebased: evaluating those pull requests before they being rebased is a waste of time, since it is evident that they are not kept synchronized and unavoidably they will eventually become different.

Please provide a clear plan as a comment (and also in the description part at the top) in this pull request, in #24490, and in all other possible affected PR: I cannot continue the review till then.

In summary: This PR depends on the PR 24490, so 24490 needs to go first. Then, this one should be rebased. These 2 PRs (24490 and 24545) are the only PR affected.

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

Your PR is unmergeable. Please have a look and possibly rebase it.

@dilsonjd
Copy link

There is already a new version but as this PR depends on the PR24490 we were waiting for his approval. Do you thing that it is a good strategy?
With which release the rebase must be done?

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

@dilsonjd : as soon as there will be an IB which includes #24490, then rebase on that IB (or on an IB newer than that)

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

perrotta commented Dec 3, 2018

Periodic check: is there anything new for this PR coming?

@dilsonjd
Copy link

dilsonjd commented Dec 3, 2018

Still waiting for an IB which includes #25355 (a clean version of #24490).

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Dec 4, 2018

I had some comments in #25355 that I would like to see addressed here

@dilsonjd this PR needs to be rebased at this point

@civanch
Copy link
Contributor

civanch commented Dec 4, 2018

@mundim , I would suggest to close this PR and start a new one on top of merged PR #25355. The new IB will be available tomorrow. 208 files in the current PR is too much, this would be good to split, I would have 1st part with only new packages alone, in the next implement interaction with the rest of CMSSW. Fimnally we need implement comments from David and Fabio everywhere, provide unit test and/or test simulations, introduce G4Region "PPS".

@mundim
Copy link
Contributor Author

mundim commented Dec 5, 2018

As recommended above, closing this PR, waiting for the approval of PR #25355, when a PR for these packages will be resubmitted.

@mundim mundim closed this Dec 5, 2018
@mundim mundim mentioned this pull request Mar 15, 2019
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.