-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
Fix crash in ECAL local reco on GPU if ECAL is not in the run - 113X #34293
Fix crash in ECAL local reco on GPU if ECAL is not in the run - 113X #34293
Conversation
A new Pull Request was created by @thomreis (Thomas Reis) for CMSSW_11_3_X. It involves the following packages: EventFilter/EcalRawToDigi @perrotta, @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
type bugfix |
backport of #34292 |
enable gpu |
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9c1433/16356/summary.html GPU Comparison SummarySummary:
Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+reconstruction
|
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_11_3_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_12_0_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
master IB test looks ok. |
+1 |
PR description:
This should fix crashes of the ECAL local reconstruction on GPU if the ECAL is not in the run as described in #34197
The changes to EcalRecHitProducerGPU.cc were not needed to fix the crash since currently the RecHits are produced on CPU only by default. However, the protection against empty inputs was added nevertheless to avoid the same issue in the future.
PR validation:
Processing of run 342110, for which ECAL was not in the run, does not crash anymore with these changes.
if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
Backport of #34292