HF shower shape fix for custom JME NanoAOD workflow

[lathomas]

PR description:

This is a fix of #31271 that resulted in failure due to the HF shower shape producer not being run for the custom JME NANOAOD (the producer is hidden behind era modifiers).
The proposed fix doesn't rely on any specific modifier.

A maybe more elegant way would be to check whether hfJetShowerShapeforNanoAOD is already present in jetSequence and add it if not. Suggestions to achieve this is welcome.

PR validation:

runTheMatrix.py -l 1325.7,10042.0,10024.0,10224.0,10824.0,10224.15,11024.15,25202.15 -i all --ibeos
gave no error (those are workflows where the NANOAOD step is run, the last three with custom JME configuration).

[cmsbuild]

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

[lathomas]

I apologize for not testing the JME custom workflow earlier.
In order to avoid that this situation happens again, may I suggest to add one of such workflows in "runTheMatrix.py -l limited -i all --ibeos" ?
Thanks !

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-31446/18325

• This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

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

It involves the following packages:

PhysicsTools/NanoAOD

@gouskos, @cmsbuild, @fgolf, @mariadalfonso, @santocch, @peruzzim can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@gpetruc 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

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test workflow 10224.15,11024.15,25202.15

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
Test Parameters:

• MATRIX_EXTRAS = 11024.15,10224.15,25202.15

[slava77]

I apologize for not testing the JME custom workflow earlier.
In order to avoid that this situation happens again, may I suggest to add one of such workflows in "runTheMatrix.py -l limited -i all --ibeos" ?
Thanks !

Thank you for the promptly provided fix.

I think that the short matrix does not have to have this (yet?); this is not the main production workflow and we can't test everything in short tests. The cycle of noticing the problem in IB with a follow up fix on a time scale of a day or so seems somewhat acceptable to me.

[lathomas]

It seems the tests were aborted, not sure why...
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/9275/

[silviodonato]

please test workflow 10224.15,11024.15,25202.15
let's try again

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
Test Parameters:

• MATRIX_EXTRAS = 11024.15,10224.15,25202.15
• CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-09-11-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc820: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/9283/console Started: 2020/09/12 09:34

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 6958586
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9f1d16/9283/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_2_X_2020-09-11-2300
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9f1d16/9283/summary.html

@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-9f1d16/10224.15_TTbar_13+2017PU_JMENano+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_GenSim+DigiPU+RecoPU+HARVESTPU+Nano
• /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-9f1d16/11024.15_TTbar_13+2018PU_JMENano+TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_GenSim+DigiPU+RecoPU+HARVESTPU+Nano
• /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-9f1d16/25202.15_TTbar_13+TTbar_13+DIGIUP15_PU25+RECOUP15_PU25+HARVESTUP15_PU25+NANOUP15MC_PU25_JME

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: 2620305
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2620282
• 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

[mariadalfonso]

+xpog
add hfshower sequence also in the jmeNano

[slava77]

@silviodonato @qliphy
it appeared to be somewhat urgent.
I propose not to wait for the analysis signature (in case it's the reason that this is not merged yet).

[qliphy]

+1

[qliphy]

merge

[santocch]

+1

[cmsbuild]

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 be automatically merged.