-
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
[14_0_X] Backport of 44970 and 45820 (ScoutingNano event content changes for 2024 and T0 scenario for HLTSCOUT datatier) #45950
[14_0_X] Backport of 44970 and 45820 (ScoutingNano event content changes for 2024 and T0 scenario for HLTSCOUT datatier) #45950
Conversation
…MuonVtx for Run3_2024, drop scouting PF candidates, drop scouting tracks, add scouting PF jets (clustered at HLT), remove remove tasks related to TrigObj table, change _lambda to lambda_ for ScoutingTrack, change branch names and docs for jets to clarity, fix typo particlenet_uds to particleNet_uds, fix incorrect orders of particleNet branches in reclustered AK8 jets
…os with HLTSCOUT datatier as input
…ly for hltScouting scenario in run_CfgTest_13.sh and add it to BuildFile.xml
A new Pull Request was created by @patinkaew for CMSSW_14_0_X. It involves the following packages:
@AdrianoDee, @antoniovilela, @cmsbuild, @davidlange6, @fabiocos, @ftorrresd, @hqucms, @kskovpen, @mandrenguyen, @miquork, @rappoccio, @srimanob, @subirsarkar, @sunilUIET can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
cms-bot internal usage |
enable nano |
please test |
-1 Failed Tests: UnitTests Unit TestsI found 1 errors in the following unit tests: ---> test TestConfigDP_13 had ERRORS Comparison SummarySummary:
NANO Comparison SummarySummary:
Nano size comparison Summary:
|
Hi @hqucms, From TestConfigDP_13/testing.log, the problem is |
Pull request #45950 was updated. @AdrianoDee, @antoniovilela, @cmsbuild, @davidlange6, @fabiocos, @ftorrresd, @hqucms, @kskovpen, @mandrenguyen, @miquork, @rappoccio, @srimanob, @subirsarkar, @sunilUIET can you please check and sign again. |
please test |
+Upgrade |
+pdmv |
Pull request #45950 was updated. @antoniovilela, @cmsbuild, @davidlange6, @fabiocos, @mandrenguyen, @rappoccio can you please check and sign again. |
Hi all, The latest commit fixed the conflict with #45850 which was just merged. |
please test |
+1 Size: This PR adds an extra 20KB to repository The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic:
You can see more details here: Comparison SummarySummary:
NANO Comparison SummarySummary:
Nano size comparison Summary:
|
Only @cms-sw/operations-l2 signature is missing |
@cms-sw/operations-l2 do you see any issues on this backport? |
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_14_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_14_2_X is complete. This pull request will be automatically merged. |
PR description:
Backport to 14_0_X of
to actual data-taking release (14_0_X) to allow T0 production tests with 14_0_X and actual T0 production if tests succeed.
Details:
run3_scouting_nanoAOD_post2023
toEra_Run3_2024
.hltScouting
,hltScoutingEra_Run3_2024
from #44970.hltScoutingEra_Run3_2024
scenario to unit testrun_CfgTest_8.sh
and add new unit testrun_CfgTest_13.sh
specific forhltScouting
scenarios from #44970.ScoutingNANOdata140Xrun3
is added. The input file and lumisection range are the same as in #45419. The names are the same as in #45419 forNANO_data14.0
,ScoutingPFRun32024RAW14.0
,ScoutingNANOdata140Xrun3
, exceptNANO_dataRun3ScoutingPF14.0
which corresponds toscoutingNANO_data14.0
in #45419. This is to keep a convention used in 14_0_X release.Event size is measured with relval_nano matrix. These are default ScoutingNano with only scouting objects and without standard offline objects and without gen info (for mc).
Workflow 2500.5 is similar to 2500.131 and 2500.6 is similar to 2500.237 after #45419, so measured event sizes are the same. 2500.51 uses TTBarMINIAOD13.3 while 2500.227 after #45419 uses TTbarMINIAOD14.0, so measured event sizes are slightly different.
Size reports (root files used and size report html files) can be found in 09.07.2024_ScoutingNano_size_reports.
Note: another related PR is #45949 which is a backport of #45820 to 14_1_X to ensure that the event content changes are consistent in subsequent releases across 14_0_X, 14_1_X, and 14_2_X.
PR validation:
Pass all standard unit tests from
scram b runtests
when running onel8_amd64_gcc12
:when running on
el9_amd64_gcc12
, pass all unit tests fromscram b runtests
except:This unit test failure on
el9_amd64_gcc12
seems to relate to #45614.Next following tests are all done on
el8_amd64_gcc12
.Pass all tests from
runTheMatrix.py -l limited -i all --ibeos
Other tests:
RunPromptReco.py
example. The outputs look reasonable:runTheMatrix.py --ibeos -l 2500.6
(added ScoutingNano workflow) passes and the output nano file looks reasonablecmsDriver.py
example. The output looks reasonable:If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:
Original PRs are #44970 and #45820. This is a backport to 14_0_X.
FYI: @elfontan @silviodonato