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

Copy also chi2 for HCAL RecHits in HCALRecHitSoAProducer #47256

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

makortel
Copy link
Contributor

@makortel makortel commented Feb 4, 2025

PR description:

Fixes #47233. See #47233 (comment) in particular.

Resolves cms-sw/framework-team#1213

PR validation:

Ran step3 of workflow 12834.423 on CMSSW_15_0_X_2025-01-30-1100 with and without #47226, and with this PR the DQM output agrees between the two.

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:

To be backported to 15_0_X if master moves to 15_1_X before this PR gets merged.

Later code has conditional code on chi2, that would lead to undefined
behavior if not initialized.
@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 4, 2025

cms-bot internal usage

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 4, 2025

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor Author

makortel commented Feb 4, 2025

assign heterogeneous

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor Author

makortel commented Feb 4, 2025

type bugfix

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 4, 2025

New categories assigned: heterogeneous

@fwyzard,@makortel you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 4, 2025

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

It involves the following packages:

  • RecoParticleFlow/PFRecHitProducer (reconstruction)

@cmsbuild, @fwyzard, @jfernan2, @makortel, @mandrenguyen can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@hatakeyamak, @lgray, @missirol, @mmarionncern, @seemasharmafnal 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

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor Author

makortel commented Feb 4, 2025

enable gpu

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor Author

makortel commented Feb 4, 2025

@cmsbuild, please test

@fwyzard
Copy link
Contributor

fwyzard commented Feb 4, 2025

+heterogeneous

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 4, 2025

+1

Size: This PR adds an extra 20KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-24da35/44173/summary.html
COMMIT: d882b50
CMSSW: CMSSW_15_0_X_2025-02-03-2300/el8_amd64_gcc12
Additional Tests: GPU
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/47256/44173/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

GPU Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 7
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 53071
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 33
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 53038
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 6 files compared)
  • Checked 24 log files, 30 edm output root files, 7 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor Author

makortel commented Feb 4, 2025

CPU differences are related to #39803 and #47071

GPU differences look related to pixel code.

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

jfernan2 commented Feb 4, 2025

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 4, 2025

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment