cmssw: Enforce that Process can have at most one Schedule object, and the label must be schedule

There should be 0 or 1 cms.Schedule objects in the cms.Process, and the label of the cms.Schedule should be schedule.

Issue https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/issues/35624 made it apparent that ConfigBuilder and HLT menus have been using cms.Schedule object labelled HLTSchedule for a long time. We should look into expressing the desired behavior with the label process.schedule, after which we could enforce the rule.

About this issue

Original URL
State: open
Created 3 years ago
Comments: 16 (16 by maintainers)

Commits related to this issue

make HLT use "schedule" For more information, see https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/issues/35842 — committed to missirol/cmssw by missirol 3 years ago
make HLT use "schedule" For more information, see https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/issues/35842 — committed to silviodonato/cmssw by missirol 3 years ago

Most upvoted comments

Hi all, a quick update on this issue from the HLT side.

A reminder: the goal is to deploy an update of ConfDB (external to CMSSW) so that it outputs schedule instead of HLTSchedule (thus removing all refs to HLTSchedule in master moving forward).

This ConfDB update can have side effects for users of 12_{0,1}_X, so HLT needs to make sure this is minimised (users of releases “< 12_X_Y” have access only to an older version of ConfDB, a.k.a. “ConfDB-v2”, which will not be updated anyway).

As discussed in #36237, we converged on the following plan:

12_0_X: needs #36251, which is an ad-hoc change for this release, so that HLT can continue to deliver HLTSchedule to its clients.
12_1_X: needs #36252, which is a backport of #35858 (and a related PR), putting 12_1_X on the same footing as 12_2_X; since HLT development is mostly done in 12_1 and 12_2 these days, making the two branches as close as possible is considered the preferred way to go.
12_2_X (currently, master): ready for the ConfDB update, no further action needed.

This plan implies that a new 12_0 release and a new 12_1 release will be needed. After that, it would be possible to deploy the ConfDB update, and complete the HLT side of this issue.

Please let us know if you see any issues with this plan.

missirol on Nov 25, 2021

Thanks @missirol!

makortel on Dec 10, 2021

We could also do it for 12_2_0 already, ie, between now and early January and see during this period if there are unexpected side effects. The ConfDb change only affects the extracted py configs. In any case we need to advertise in Monday/Wednesday TSG meetings

Martin-Grunewald on Nov 10, 2021

@missirol I can’t comment when would be a good time to make the change in ConfDB itself (except I’m fully with you that it needs to be planned carefully), but I thank you for all the work in CMSSW side!

makortel on Nov 10, 2021