-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.6k
Add G4HepEm to CMSSW #39736
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
Add G4HepEm to CMSSW #39736
Conversation
|
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-39736/32579 ERROR: Build errors found during clang-tidy run. |
|
code-checks with cms.week0.PR_b82b891d/52.0-5cce5a899ed266ff8656f99553f33e4a |
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-39736/32591
|
|
A new Pull Request was created by @hahnjo (Jonas Hahnfeld) for master. It involves the following packages:
@smuzaffar, @civanch, @Dr15Jones, @makortel, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
test parameters:
|
|
please test |
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8ef250/28279/summary.html Comparison Summary@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Summary:
|
|
@hahnjo , does G4HepEM support models per region? In EMM we have different configurations of multiple scattering for HCAL and for the rest. |
|
@civanch no, different MSC configurations per region are not (yet) supported. This PR is only for the initial integration and making sure that everything works as expected |
|
+1 |
|
-1 Failed Tests: UnitTests 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: Unit TestsI found errors in the following unit tests: ---> test PVall had ERRORS ---> test DMRall had ERRORS Comparison SummarySummary:
|
|
@civanch @smuzaffar I don't see how the failure can be related to my changes, the new physics list isn't even active by default... |
|
@smuzaffar , we discussed with @hahnjo and he propose to test this PR without extra external build. Does this make sense? |
|
please test |
|
I restart testing, because in previous tests the problem was in access to file in calibration unit tests. This should not depend on this PR. |
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8ef250/28975/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
|
+1 |
|
@smuzaffar , it seems that PR is OK. |
|
@makortel , may be you can approve this PR? We converged since several days. It should not affect any standard WF in this form. |
|
I was hoping @smuzaffar would sign |
|
+core |
|
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) |
|
+1
|
PR description:
The new EMH physics list replaces the EM processes for electrons, positrons, and gammas with G4HepEm. Note that gamma-lepto-nuclear interactions are NOT implemented yet, and disabled for this physics list (by removing
G4EmExtraPhysics).NOTE: depends on cms-sw/cmsdist#8128
PR validation:
Running with
process.g4SimHits.Physics.type = 'SimG4Core/Physics/FTFP_BERT_EMH'works, validation of this experimental physics list will follow.