Low energy particle removal for FCS

Goal: Implement option to remove low energy particles when they exit the inner detector irrespective of the pdg-ID

Implementation: Add an option to the previously existing FastIDKiller. The default behaviour of the FastIDKiller is unaltered. The energy threshold used in the FastIDKiller is now configurable via a SimFlag. The new option enabling the removal of all low energy particles can also be enabled via a SimFlag.

added 21.0 label

added Simulation label

Hi @jchapman, here are the changes needed to remove low energy particles in G4. Can you please take a look? Since, @bwinter made this configurable with sim flag, we can just merge this and don't really need to create a private release ? Thanks, Hasib

unassigned @bwinter

Jenkins please retry a build

This merge request affects 1 package:

• Simulation/G4Utilities/G4UserActions

Adding @jchapman ,@vpascuzz as watchers

The changes look reasonable to me. I agree that they shouldn't affect standard production configurations an so are safe to be merged.

CI Result SUCCESS

	Athena	AthDataQuality	AthSimulation
externals
cmake
make
required tests
optional tests

Full details available at NICOS MR-24796-2019-07-11-14-22
Athena: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
AthDataQuality: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
AthSimulation: number of compilation errors 0, warnings 0
For experts only: Jenkins output [CI-MERGE-REQUEST 39863]

unmarked as a Work In Progress

Hi @bwinter, can you also please add ATLAS Robot as developer to your fork? (https://atlassoftwaredocs.web.cern.ch/gittutorial/gitlab-fork/#add-your-friendly-build-bot)

Tadej (L2)

added review-pending-level-1 label

Hi @tadej,

thanks for the note. The ATLAS Robot is now added.

Cheers, Benedict

added review-approved label and removed review-pending-level-1 label

Changes look ok to me.--MR L1

merged

mentioned in commit f49f4a2a

added sweep:done label

added sweep:failed label

Sweep summary
failed:

• master

Hi @bwinter,

Can you please also submit this against master?

Thanks, Tadej

Hi @tadej,

what is the most efficient way of doing this? Sorry for the rather basic question.

Cheers, Benedict

You can try using the GitLab cherry-pick button above (not sure it will work though).

If it doesn't, you make a new branch out of master and then do

git cherry-pick <hash>

for each for your three commits and fix the conflicts when they happen.

Hi @tadej,

I opened the MR here !24964 (merged) For now I put it in WIP state.

Best, Benedict

removed sweep:failed label

mentioned in merge request !25152 (merged)

mentioned in merge request !25152 (merged)

mentioned in commit 6092b5bd