-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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
Make _relval GTs symbolic and resnapshot Run3 data GTs #40692
Conversation
test parameters:
|
@sunilUIET are the relvals at pre-releases taking a wf number from CMSSW, or does that run through some other system? |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-40692/34052
|
A new Pull Request was created by @tvami (Tamas Vami) for master. It involves the following packages:
@malbouis, @yuanchao, @AdrianoDee, @bbilin, @Martin-Grunewald, @cmsbuild, @missirol, @srimanob, @saumyaphor4252, @kskovpen, @sunilUIET, @tvami, @ChrisMisan, @francescobrivio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
@cmsbuild , please test |
-1 Failed Tests: RelVals AddOn RelVals
Expand to see more relval errors ...AddOn Tests
Expand to see more addon errors ... |
Additional questions:
|
hi @missirol , thanks for your comments,
is this really intended? There is no
Because there is no
ok I'll do that too |
Yes, that is the idea. What The other questions hint at the fact that, if some updates are done upstream (e.g. adding |
6caf451
to
e9139db
Compare
+hlt |
+pdmv |
+1 |
+alca
|
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. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
"auto:run2_data_relval" is still needed by
|
@perrotta that's fine, we are still providing |
+1 |
PR description:
Discussed in https://cms-talk.web.cern.ch/t/reviewing-auto-relval-content-and-making-it-symbolic-gt/19584
We make the
_relval
GTs symbolic since they change less often and this way we can avoid mismatches between the GT and the GTs meant to be used with a fixed L1T menu.We also propose to move away from using the offline (rereco) GT for data validations in the relvals, they should use the prompt GT instead (which in Run-3 is certainly almost already physics quality).
To be consistent with the relval GT, the frozen GTs were resnapshoted as well. The diff in GTs is just in the visible IOVs:
There is a lot of things using
auto:run3_data
https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/search?p=2&q=auto%3Arun3_data
which we should probably revise, but that is beyond this PR.
PR validation:
runs fine.
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:
Not a backport. Given the GT names and that the current data taking release is 12_6_X, it would make sense to backport to 12_6_X