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

MTD reconstruction: save correct outermost hit position also for tracks w/o last hit in mtd #46752

Merged

Conversation

martinamalberti
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

This PR implement a fix of the outermost hit position value, saved by the TrackExtenterWithMTD class, for tracks w/o last hit in MTD.

PR validation:

The code compiles, runs and produces expected results.
Tested on workflow 29607.0.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 21, 2024

cms-bot internal usage

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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

It involves the following packages:

  • RecoMTD/TrackExtender (upgrade, reconstruction)

@Moanwar, @cmsbuild, @jfernan2, @mandrenguyen, @srimanob, @subirsarkar can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@fabiocos, @missirol this is something you requested to watch as well.
@antoniovilela, @mandrenguyen, @rappoccio, @sextonkennedy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

enable profiling

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1

Failed Tests: RelVals-INPUT
Size: This PR adds an extra 12KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-119d70/42986/summary.html
COMMIT: 550e9be
CMSSW: CMSSW_14_2_X_2024-11-21-1100/el8_amd64_gcc12
Additional Tests: PROFILING
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/46752/42986/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

RelVals-INPUT

Expand to see more relval errors ...

Comparison Summary

Summary:

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

please test

all failures in previous test look unrelated to this PR

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Milestone for this pull request has been moved to CMSSW_15_0_X. Please open a backport if it should also go in to CMSSW_14_2_X.

@cmsbuild cmsbuild modified the milestones: CMSSW_14_2_X, CMSSW_15_0_X Nov 22, 2024
@cmsbuild cmsbuild added this to the CMSSW_15_0_X milestone Nov 22, 2024
@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Size: This PR adds an extra 12KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-119d70/43006/summary.html
COMMIT: 550e9be
CMSSW: CMSSW_14_2_X_2024-11-21-2300/el8_amd64_gcc12
Additional Tests: PROFILING
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/46752/43006/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 14 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 46
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3483722
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 420
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3483282
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 45 files compared)
  • Checked 202 log files, 172 edm output root files, 46 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

@martinamalberti @jfernan2 this is effectively a bug fix, although not a critical one, probably it might make sense to backport it to 14_2_X, now that we have moved forward

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Dec 2, 2024

@cms-sw/upgrade-l2 any comment?

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Dec 2, 2024

type bugfix

@Moanwar
Copy link
Contributor

Moanwar commented Dec 2, 2024

@cms-sw/upgrade-l2 any comment?

Hi @fabiocos , I wrote a comment above about double-checking the trackMaxBtlEta_. In the first commit, it was set to 1.48, but then it was changed to 1.5. I just wanted to confirm which value is correct. Unfortunately, I haven't received a response yet so I can approve the PR from the upgrade side. Thanks for confirming!

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Dec 2, 2024

@Moanwar eta=1.5 is consistent with the BTL/ETL separation used in Validation/MtdValidation, we agreed with @martinamalberti to use the same value as there

@Moanwar
Copy link
Contributor

Moanwar commented Dec 2, 2024

@Moanwar eta=1.5 is consistent with the BTL/ETL separation used in Validation/MtdValidation, we agreed with @martinamalberti to use the same value as there

Thanks a lot @fabiocos for confirmation :)

@Moanwar
Copy link
Contributor

Moanwar commented Dec 2, 2024

+Upgrade

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 2, 2024

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. @rappoccio, @antoniovilela, @sextonkennedy, @mandrenguyen (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@mandrenguyen
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.

6 participants