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

drop type specs in RecoEgamma #31243

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 28, 2020
Merged

drop type specs in RecoEgamma #31243

merged 3 commits into from
Aug 28, 2020

Conversation

jeongeun
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

Update the safer syntax for existing parameter :

  • drop type specifications where the original parameter exists.
  • move all parameter inside the clone

Instead of modifying parameters with full type specs, which can be interpreted as an insertion of a new parameter, it is a safer way to protect from parameter name mistakes and will also help in possible parameter migrations.
(The references were PR#30700, PR#30827, PR#30947,PR#31162,)

In this PR, total 36 files updated.

  • RecoEgamma/{EgammaPhotonProducers} 23 files
  • RecoEgamma/{EgammaElectronProducers} 5 files
  • RecoEgamma/{EgammaIsolationAlgos} 4 files
  • RecoEgamma/{EgammaTools} 2 files
  • RecoEgamma/{ElectronIdentification} 1 file
  • RecoEgamma/{PhotonIdentification} 1 file

PR validation:

Event Content comparison check was also done and there is no change with these updates.
Tested in CMSSW_11_2_X, the basic test all passed in the CMSSW PR instructions.

@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-31243/17899

  • This PR adds an extra 32KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @jeongeun (JeongEun Lee) for master.

It involves the following packages:

RecoEgamma/EgammaElectronProducers
RecoEgamma/EgammaIsolationAlgos
RecoEgamma/EgammaPhotonProducers
RecoEgamma/EgammaTools
RecoEgamma/ElectronIdentification
RecoEgamma/PhotonIdentification

@perrotta, @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Sam-Harper, @jainshilpi, @rovere, @lgray, @sobhatta, @lecriste, @afiqaize, @varuns23 this is something you requested to watch as well.
@silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

Comment on lines 74 to 75
elPFIsoValueCharged04 = elPFIsoValueCharged03.clone()
elPFIsoValueCharged04.deposits[0].deltaR = cms.double(0.4)
elPFIsoValueCharged04.deposits[0].deltaR = 0.4
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was looking at a similar case earlier today, it looks like the following syntax works and can let us further simplify the replacement cases in vectors

Suggested change
elPFIsoValueCharged04 = elPFIsoValueCharged03.clone()
elPFIsoValueCharged04.deposits[0].deltaR = cms.double(0.4)
elPFIsoValueCharged04.deposits[0].deltaR = 0.4
elPFIsoValueCharged04 = elPFIsoValueCharged03.clone(deposits = {0: dict(deltaR = 0.4)} )

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Aug 25, 2020

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 25, 2020

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1
Tested at: ce21f59
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b695ed/8919/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-08-25-1100
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b695ed/8919/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • You potentially added 786 lines to the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2609656
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2609633
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 34 files compared)
  • Checked 149 log files, 22 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 28, 2020

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1
Tested at: a459453
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b695ed/8974/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-08-27-2300
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b695ed/8974/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2609667
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2609644
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 34 files compared)
  • Checked 149 log files, 22 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

  • No significant changes to the logs found

Ok, better now

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

+1

  • Technical cleaning of the syntax for parameters passed to cloned/modified modules, as specified in the PR description
  • Jenkins tests pass

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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. @silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@silviodonato
Copy link
Contributor

+1

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.

5 participants