-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
[HGCAL trigger] Configurations fixes and updates #43706
Conversation
cms-bot internal usage |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-43706/38395
|
A new Pull Request was created by @jbsauvan (Jean-Baptiste Sauvan) for master. It involves the following packages:
@subirsarkar, @epalencia, @cmsbuild, @aloeliger, @srimanob 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-3b33ee/36881/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
@pallabidas & @artlbv Just bringing this to your attention, pallabi because this is HGCal inputs to calo, and artur because that means it may be physics affecting. |
+l1 |
@jbsauvan does this actually change anything performance-wise in the HGCAL TPs? If yes, could you link to some slides etc showing this? merci! |
Hi @artlbv |
Milestone for this pull request has been moved to CMSSW_14_1_X. Please open a backport if it should also go in to CMSSW_14_0_X. |
I indeed did a rebase on |
Ok, many thanks for checking. |
Ok, let's get the L2 signatures again and then merge. |
thanks for the clarifications @jbsauvan !
@srimanob if i understand correctly, since the 125X MC campaign the geometry was at least D88 -> C17 -> V16. Also @EmyrClement FYI I assume we can expect some impacts down the line? |
@antoniovilela , @iarspider and I believe bot should not have reset sign in this case. Even though PR was rebased but there were no changes difference between original PR and squashed PR. In order to test why bot resetted signs I am manually editing #43706 (comment) to see what bot did |
Ok, many thanks. |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs after it passes the integration tests. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @sextonkennedy, @rappoccio, @antoniovilela (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
@antoniovilela , there was a bug and bot was not proerly reading the previously cached information. This is fixed now and bot has properly kept the signatures |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3b33ee/37308/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
Great, thanks! |
+1 |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3b33ee/37315/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
PR description:
Associated internal PRs and reviews:
PR validation:
Tested D86, D92, D94 workflows