Migrate module configurations in {JetMETCorrections,PhysicsTools} to use automatically generated cfi default/reference configurations #33307
Conversation
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33307/21836
|
|
A new Pull Request was created by @jeongeun (JeongEun Lee) for master. It involves the following packages: JetMETCorrections/Type1MET @perrotta, @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
please test |
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b779fa/13870/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
jeongeun
changed the title
| cleanedPFCandProducer = _mod.candPtrProjector.clone( | ||
| src = pfCandCollection, | ||
| veto = badMuonCollection | ||
| ) | ||
| else: | ||
| cleanedPFCandProducer = cms.EDProducer("PFCandPtrProjector", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not able to find a PFCandPtrProjector plugin anywhere in CMSSW, not even in 9_1_X (which is the release where this config was introduced with #18165)
@mmarionncern and @zdemirag: do you remember where that plugin was defined?
By the way, isn't this config already obsolete (and candidate for possible deletion)? corMETFromMuonAndEG is only called by PhysicsTools/PatAlgos/python/slimming/extraSlimmedMETs_MuEGFixMoriond2017.py, which according to the name is quite likely not needed any more. (Moreover, muCorrection=False in there , and therefore this muonRecoMitigation wasn't actually ever accessed even from there...)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@kirschen @lathomas @ahinzmann (as mmarionncern original developer left the field)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
perhaps it's a more general XPOG question (as it was initially introduced via XPOG): do we still need to support the muon reco duplicate mitigation?
If not, it could be dropped.
|
Hi all I might call it something more meaningful for future developments. |
@alefisico that |
|
@kirschen @lathomas @ahinzmann @mariadalfonso : could you please verify if we still need to support the muon reco duplicate mitigation? If so, my question about the possible location of the Since this PR is technically correct, once clarified what above we could even accept it in the release, and open a github issue to keep track of the proposed further cleanup and/or adjustments: but I would like to profit of this fortuitous occasion to clarify this point, before signing the PR and forgetting it still for a while. |
|
+1
|
cmsbuild
added
fully-signed
and removed
pending-signatures
reconstruction-pending
labels
|
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) |
|
+1 |
PR description:
Optimization of the python configurations: Improve maintainability by cleaning up the duplicated and cloning from the default/reference configurations.
In this PR, 4 files changed. (The reference PR is PR#33207 )
commit 1 :
Replace explicit configuration with a reference from cfipython/. (migrating EDProducer("type", .. -> typeDefaylt.clone() )
Remove the type specifications already presented in cfipython/fillDescriptions reference for improved syntax safty.
commit 2 :
Remove the duplicated parameters that are exactly the same value in cfipython reference.
PR validation:
Event Content comparison check was also done and there is no change with these updates.
Tested in CMSSW_11_3_X, the basic test all passed in the CMSSW PR instructions.
@camclean @alefisico please check and confirm if this update is acceptable.