Skip to content
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

Adding Timing vs BX plots, and modifying thresholds for laser quality #18069

Merged

Conversation

tanmaymudholkar
Copy link
Contributor

Companion to Deployment PR#455: dmwm/deployment#455

PR to CMSSW master: #18067

  • Added new plots for the average partition timing v/s BX number.
  • Changed expected values of laser timing from 4.2 clocks to 3.7 clocks for Laser 2. Also changed (the value of the deviation from the expected timing above which bad quality is triggered) to 1.0.

…eviation from this expected value which triggers RED in the quality plot, and changed the binning range to more clearly see the full shape.
@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @tanmaymudholkar (Tanmay Mudholkar) for CMSSW_9_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

DQM/EcalMonitorClient
DQM/EcalMonitorTasks

@cmsbuild, @dmitrijus, @vanbesien, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@argiro this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

@tanmaymudholkar tanmaymudholkar changed the title Timing vs bx and laser timing 900 Adding Timing vs BX plots, and modifying thresholds for laser quality Mar 24, 2017
@tanmaymudholkar
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @davidlange6 , @dmitrijus , I wonder if we need to start the procedure (automated testing etc.) to get this merged with 90X.

Automated tests have already been run on the corresponding 91X version: #18067 , which now awaits ORP approval before merging.

In addition, thanks to some quick work by core DQM, this PR has already been applied as a patch onto the production version at P5.

@dmitrijus
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @tanmaymudholkar, wait for until 91x is merged.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #18069 was updated. @cmsbuild, @dmitrijus, @vanbesien, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

@tanmaymudholkar
Copy link
Contributor Author

I recently added a commit here to improve code readability. Please see the conversation in the 91X PR: #18067

@dmitrijus
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 11, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/19108/console Started: 2017/04/11 17:27

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_9_0_X IBs after it passes the integration tests. This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @smuzaffar

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-18069/19108/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • You potentially added 3 lines to the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 23
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 1915960
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 44274
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 1871513
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 173
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • Checked 94 log files, 14 edm output root files, 23 DQM output files

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit cab1076 into cms-sw:CMSSW_9_0_X Apr 27, 2017
@tanmaymudholkar tanmaymudholkar deleted the TimingVsBX_and_LaserTiming_900 branch April 27, 2017 12:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants