Create new collection for Hcal lasermon digis + Hcal unpacker updates

[jkunkle]

This is a backport of this pull request #22385 aimed at 10_0_4. The intent is to have it available for testing at p5. The backport did not require any merging, so we expect no isues.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @jkunkle for CMSSW_10_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

CalibFormats/HcalObjects
DataFormats/HcalDetId
EventFilter/HcalRawToDigi
RecoMET/METProducers

@perrotta, @ghellwig, @civanch, @arunhep, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @cerminar, @slava77, @lpernie can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @jdamgov, @TaiSakuma, @gouskos, @ahinzmann, @mmarionncern, @rovere, @Martin-Grunewald, @jdolen, @nhanvtran, @gkasieczka, @tocheng, @schoef, @mmusich, @mariadalfonso, @seemasharmafnal this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

• Backported from Create new collection for Hcal lasermon digis + Hcal unpacker updates #22385

[perrotta]

backport of #22385

[perrotta]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/26728/console Started: 2018/03/09 12:55

[perrotta]

Please @jkunkle : edit the title with something more descriptive, even better if it is the same as you used for the PR in the master (so that they can get easily linked each other)

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-22544/26728/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 27
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2468459
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2468289
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 169
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.709999999963 KiB( 22 files compared)
• Checked 111 log files, 9 edm output root files, 27 DQM output files

[perrotta]

+1

• Identical to Create new collection for Hcal lasermon digis + Hcal unpacker updates #22385, which is now merged in the master
• Backport to 10_0_X required for its usage foreseen in the commissioning data taking
• Keep laser monitoring data in the event
• In case of data with extra samples in FED, those extra samples are now also unpacked and saved for further private studies (not being used for the current workflows)
• No change expected and observed in reco outputs in the standard workflows, while new output will get stored in case of lasermon events or extra samples in the FED

[lpernie]

+1

[civanch]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_10_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_10_1_X is complete. 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)

[deguio]

Hi @fabiocos
if possible it would be nice to have this one in 10_0_4. it would give the possibility to test extensively the changes in p5 during the cruzet.
thanks,
F.

[slava77]

@fabiocos
what is the plan for the next build?

[fabiocos]

@slava77 @jkunkle this is in 10_1_X already. If this should be tried at P5 before 10_1_0, we need to consider a 10_0_5 (DataFormats are changed here)

[deguio]

Hi @fabiocos
right. we would like to have a 10_0_5 available to test this indeed.
thanks,
F.

[fabiocos]

+1

[slava77]

@fabiocos
just a warning in case someone will pay attention to the production logs,
this PR is expected to lead to ~2K lines of warnings per job (8 thread case).
This shouldn't be a big deal for logCollection and archiving at T0, but may become quite distracting for log file content inspection

more in #22706

[davidlange6]

hum - should those extra lines not show up in the PR tests? [2k lines is pretty annoying actually]

…

On Mar 22, 2018, at 11:42 PM, Slava Krutelyov ***@***.***> wrote: @fabiocos just a warning in case someone will pay attention to the production logs, this PR is expected to lead to ~2K lines of warnings per job (8 thread case). This shouldn't be a big deal for logCollection and archiving at T0, but may become quite distracting for log file content inspection more in #22706 — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[deguio]

Hi,
the warnings are triggered by new calibration channels being included in the readout in recent runs at p5. this PR should actually reduce the number of warnings that we would get with the old version of the code.

at the moment we (hcal DPG and hca OPS) are deciding how to configure readout/emap/unpacker in an optimal way to support transparently the use of the HF calib channels. a dedicated discussion will happen on Monday.

In the meantime it would be beneficial to have this PR included in the 10_0_5 build as it fixes the behaviour of the old unpacker when processing lasermon channels.

[slava77]

On 3/23/18 2:13 AM, Federico De Guio wrote: Hi, the warnings are triggered by new calibration channels being included in the readout in recent runs at p5. this PR should actually reduce the number of warnings that we would get with the old version of the code.

Ah, I had the sign of the issue wrong in my head. This PR is actually better, but still not good enough.

…

at the moment we (hcal DPG and hca OPS) are deciding how to configure readout/emap/unpacker in an optimal way to support transparently the use of the HF calib channels. a dedicated discussion will happen on Monday. In the meantime it would be beneficial to have this PR included in the 10_0_5 build as it fixes the behaviour of the old unpacker when processing lasermon channels.