-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33
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
Remove add_input_for_banner from output.py (plugin_run_card is not needed in cudacpp) #1016
Conversation
…se plugin_run_card is not needed in cudacpp (madgraph5#1015)
…from output.py (plugin_run_card is not needed in cudacpp)
…banner madgraph5#1015 - this triggers the removal of *.mad/bin/internal/plugin_run_card
…est upstream/master for easier merging git checkout upstream/master $(git ls-tree --name-only upstream/master */CODEGEN*txt)
Hi @oliviermattelaer as discussed via email. This is N=1 in the pipeline of PRs I would like to merge. This is ready as is, should be merged to master. Please tell me if I can go ahead, thanks! |
Ok, I do not like this PR ... I either see this has half full or half empty PR. (meaning it either due too much or too little). So here are two counter proposal:
With all due respect, this is NOT something needed for CHEP (since this is a pure cleaning of the code which has zero impact on anything, so this can be put in super low priority). So let's discuss this at our meeting today. Cheers, Olivier |
Hi @oliviermattelaer thanks :-) I would vote for option 1 then. I do not see the need for plugin_run_card since we have launch_plugin.py. I think you introduced first plugin_run_card and then launch_plugin.py, but I thought that maybe you had other plugins in mind too. If they are both for cudacpp, then I think that launch_plugin.py is enough, and we can remove plugin_run_card. Can you do the removal of plugin_run_card from mg5amcnlo yourself, whenever you have time? This is low priority I agree. The reason I put this first in my 'pipeline' is that the subsequent PRs also touch runcards, and I did not want to have to do things there in plugin_run_card if I knew that this was not needed anyway. By the way I still think that this PR as is makes sense, if we eventually remove plugin_run_card. It is "too little" because it only removes it from cudacpp and not from mg5amcnlo, but inside cudacpp it should be ok? Well I can COMPLETELY remove all mentioning of plugin_runcard in cudacpp, rather than leave it commented out. But otherwise I do not see what elese needs to change in cudacpp itself?
My point was that I will produce profiling numbers for CHEP and I wanted to do it if possible from stuff merged in master. But not a problem, I will do it from my branch and then we can merge in master later on also after CHEP. By the way there is no dev meeting today, it's next week. |
…se launch_plugin.py instead See madgraph5/madgraph4gpu#1015 See madgraph5/madgraph4gpu#1016
…se launch_plugin.py instead This reverts most of commit 8d9f3f1 See madgraph5/madgraph4gpu#1015 See madgraph5/madgraph4gpu#1016
I prepared a WIP PR Is this what you had in mind? |
Yes I merged the associated PR |
… branch including plugin_input and driver.f fixes) See mg5amcnlo/mg5amcnlo#148 Allow patching header/initialise/finalise in driver.f See mg5amcnlo/mg5amcnlo#149 Remove plugin_input and plugin_run_card completely
…livier See mg5amcnlo/mg5amcnlo#149 (remove plugin_input and plugin_run_card completely)
…cnlo (functionally equivalent, only line numbers change) Only the following files are needed to build the patch: - 1 in patch.common: SubProcesses/makefile - 2 in patch.P1: driver.f, matrix1.f ./CODEGEN/generateAndCompare.sh gg_tt --mad --nopatch git diff --no-ext-diff -R gg_tt.mad/SubProcesses/makefile > CODEGEN/PLUGIN/CUDACPP_SA_OUTPUT/MG5aMC_patches/PROD/patch.common git diff --no-ext-diff -R gg_tt.mad/SubProcesses/P1_gg_ttx/driver.f gg_tt.mad/SubProcesses/P1_gg_ttx/matrix1.f > CODEGEN/PLUGIN/CUDACPP_SA_OUTPUT/MG5aMC_patches/PROD/patch.P1 git checkout gg_tt.mad (Later checked that gg_tt.mad code is regenerated with no changes in c++/fortran - quite a few python changes however)
Hi @oliviermattelaer thanks :-) I have modified this PR accordingly
Is this ok for merging now or are there other things to fix/improve? Thanks |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, this is good to go.
Thanks,
Olivier
Thanks to you :-) Merging now |
Hi @oliviermattelaer this is a very simple PR to remove add_input_for_banner from output.py (plugin_run_card is not needed in cudacpp)
It fixes #1015. As described there:
Can you please review?
I need to get this out to then mak eprogress on other things for CHEP
Thanks Andrea