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

[HCAL] Make sure that trigger towers with abs(ieta)=16 are processed with QIE8 settings in 2018. #22077

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 8, 2018

Conversation

matz-e
Copy link
Contributor

@matz-e matz-e commented Feb 1, 2018

Fixes a crash when only the last depth of tower 16 is present.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 1, 2018

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 1, 2018

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 1, 2018

A new Pull Request was created by @matz-e (Matthias Wolf) for master.

It involves the following packages:

SimCalorimetry/HcalTrigPrimAlgos

@nsmith-, @cmsbuild, @thomreis, @rekovic can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@thomreis
Copy link
Contributor

thomreis commented Feb 1, 2018

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 1, 2018

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/25850/console Started: 2018/02/01 18:48

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 1, 2018

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 1, 2018

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 1, 2018

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-22077/25850/summary.html

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

  • /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/results/JR-comparison/PR-22077/1325.7_TTbar_13_94XNanoAODINPUT+TTbar_13_94XNanoAODINPUT+NANOEDMMC2017

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 26
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2465763
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2465593
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 169
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 1.12000000005 KiB( 22 files compared)
  • Checked 110 log files, 9 edm output root files, 26 DQM output files

@deguio
Copy link
Contributor

deguio commented Feb 2, 2018

Hi @matz-e
is this relevant for 10_0_X and MC production?
thanks.

@christopheralanwest @hatakeyamak @mariadalfonso

@matz-e
Copy link
Contributor Author

matz-e commented Feb 2, 2018

in principle, I think, yes. But I also think that the likelihood of triggering the bug being fixed is quite small.

The bug requires energy deposits/data frames in depth 4 of tower 16 and no energy/data frames for depths 1-3. My guess is that this would mainly occur (with a very small probability — basically energy leaking from 17 -> 16) when using the emulation from RAW with zero-suppression, and as such the the regular simulation chain should not really be impacted.

Do you want me to file a backport PR for 10_0_X?

@deguio
Copy link
Contributor

deguio commented Feb 2, 2018

Hi,
maybe electronic noise in simulation can also trigger the problem?

to be on the safe side I would backport to 10_0_X. we don't want to have unexpected crashes when the MC is submitted.

thanks,
F.

@fabiocos

@christopheralanwest
Copy link
Contributor

@deguio Another motivation for the backport is the online and offline DQM. The crash could be triggered by tests in which the laser is fired into the HEM or HEP megatiles in a global run. Such tests are often done to validate the latency of TPs sent to L1.

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Feb 7, 2018

@thomreis @rekovic could you please check?

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Feb 7, 2018

@thomreis @rekovic could you please check? If we need this in 10_0_X it should be integrated asap. For what I can see the code looks reasonable, but I would like an expert to cross check.

@nsmith-
Copy link
Contributor

nsmith- commented Feb 7, 2018

IMHO these packages could be under HCAL signature and not L1: the interface between calorimeter and trigger responsibility is at the trigger primitive level, both in hardware and software. This change won't affect that interface. As the expert on the downstream consumer of these trigger primitives,
+1

@thomreis
Copy link
Contributor

thomreis commented Feb 7, 2018

+1

The right way around.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 7, 2018

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Feb 8, 2018

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 1ea4c27 into cms-sw:master Feb 8, 2018
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

7 participants