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

Clean up Phase-2 Geometry D86, D88, D91, D92, D93, D94, D97 #45370

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 20, 2024

Conversation

srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

@srimanob srimanob commented Jul 3, 2024

PR description:

This PR follows the issue #43251 to clean up all geometries with I14 and I15. With this PR, T24, T25, T30, I14, I15, O8 become unused geometries. They are in the list of obsolete subdetectors.

We will need a follow up PR, to introduce new geometry with HFNose to replace D94.

FYI @cms-sw/mtd-dpg-l2 @cms-sw/geometry-l2 @cms-sw/trk-dpg-l2 @emiglior @cms-sw/l1-l2

PR validation:

Try to dump D95, D110 config. runTheMatrix gives the proper config files.

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:

No need of backport.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jul 3, 2024

cms-bot internal usage

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jul 3, 2024

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-45370/40803

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jul 3, 2024

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

It involves the following packages:

  • Configuration/Geometry (geometry, upgrade)
  • Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (pdmv, upgrade)
  • Configuration/StandardSequences (operations)
  • Geometry/CMSCommonData (geometry, upgrade)

@AdrianoDee, @Dr15Jones, @antoniovilela, @bsunanda, @civanch, @cmsbuild, @davidlange6, @fabiocos, @kskovpen, @makortel, @mdhildreth, @miquork, @rappoccio, @srimanob, @subirsarkar, @sunilUIET can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @Martin-Grunewald, @VinInn, @VourMa, @bsunanda, @dgulhan, @fabiocos, @felicepantaleo, @makortel, @martinamalberti, @missirol, @mmusich, @mtosi, @rovere, @sameasy, @slomeo, @vargasa this is something you requested to watch as well.
@antoniovilela, @rappoccio, @sextonkennedy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor Author

srimanob commented Jul 3, 2024

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jul 3, 2024

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8685c7/40204/summary.html
COMMIT: 9057358
CMSSW: CMSSW_14_1_X_2024-07-03-1100/el8_amd64_gcc12
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/45370/40204/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

  • DAS Queries: The DAS query tests failed, see the summary page for details.

Comparison Summary

There are some workflows for which there are errors in the baseline:
29634.911 step 2
The results for the comparisons for these workflows could be incomplete
This means most likely that the IB is having errors in the relvals.The error does NOT come from this pull request

Summary:

  • You potentially removed 25 lines from the logs
  • ROOTFileChecks: Some differences in event products or their sizes found
  • Reco comparison results: 3 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 46
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3148602
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3148579
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 45 files compared)
  • Checked 194 log files, 159 edm output root files, 46 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor

bsunanda commented Jul 4, 2024

@srimanob Please do not remove D94 which is the only one using HFNose

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor

bsunanda commented Jul 4, 2024

-1

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor Author

srimanob commented Jul 4, 2024

Hi @bsunanda

It would be great if you can provide the timeline of your comment in #43251 (comment) ? You mentioned that "Also we need to keep a scenario with C20. If D94 is to be deleted we have to create one with C20 as D111". I also mention in the description of this PR that we need that, I did not ignore the request, but no timeline provided on geometry side.

Is it straightforward to create new geometry with C20? The goal of the cleanup is to completely remove geometry with I14 and I15.

Thx.

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor Author

srimanob commented Jul 4, 2024

I make a draft PR of D115 which is D110 with C20 (C18+HFNose)

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor

bsunanda commented Jul 4, 2024 via email

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor

+pdmv

@bsunanda
Copy link
Contributor

+geometry

@antoniovilela
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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 be automatically merged.

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit ff4ca13 into cms-sw:master Aug 20, 2024
11 checks passed
@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Aug 21, 2024

@srimanob after this PR a bunch of unit tests relying on deprecated geometries have started to fail, see logs.
For next clean-up a full cmssw test would be commendable.

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor Author

@srimanob after this PR a bunch of unit tests relying on deprecated geometries have started to fail, see logs. For next clean-up a full cmssw test would be commendable.

Thx Marco. Sorry for that. I have on my list to update the placeholder of geometry, but I have not managed it.

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Aug 21, 2024

Sorry for that. I have on my list to update the placeholder of geometry, but I have not managed it.

No problem, I can give it a try.

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Aug 21, 2024

We have these four placeholders that you can use. By the way, it is still D98. If you would use it, you may consider to move it to D110.

I have opened #45764 as a draft. Some tests still fail after moving to the newest geometry (D110). Some more work is needed to make them run (or they could fall-back to some earlier Tracker geometry without the sensor splitting in TBPX Layer1).

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