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

Update HLT and GT packer for new HI L1 objects #25064

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Nov 1, 2018

Conversation

apana
Copy link
Contributor

@apana apana commented Oct 30, 2018

  • Update firmware version in cfi for uGT packer (gtStage2Raw_cfi.py) to pack new HI L1 objects
  • Update HLT so TriggerFilterObjectWithRefs objects get filled properly for new HI L1 objects

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-25064/7058

Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying a patch in https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-25064/7058/git-diff.patch
e.g. curl https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-25064/7058/git-diff.patch | patch -p1

You can run scram build code-checks to apply code checks directly

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @apana (Leonard Apanasvich) for master.

It involves the following packages:

DataFormats/HLTReco
DataFormats/L1TGlobal
EventFilter/L1TRawToDigi
HLTrigger/HLTfilters

@cmsbuild, @Martin-Grunewald, @nsmith-, @rekovic, @thomreis, @fwyzard can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald, @rovere, @thomreis 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

@Martin-Grunewald
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 31, 2018

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/31387/console Started: 2018/10/31 06:35

@Martin-Grunewald
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @apana

What is the type of the new variables? Are they (all?) global event variables (such as ET, ETmiss, HT), ie, one value per event, or could there be several objects of each (or some) variable in an event, (such as there could be several muons in an event, for example)?

I am asking because I need to pack this up at HLT level also...

@@ -12,7 +12,8 @@
JetInputTag = cms.InputTag("simCaloStage2Digis"),
EtSumInputTag = cms.InputTag("simCaloStage2Digis"),
FedId = cms.int32(1404),
FWId = cms.uint32(0x10A6), # FW version in GMT with vtx-etrapolation
## FWId = cms.uint32(0x10A6), # FW version in GMT with vtx-etrapolation
FWId = cms.uint32(0x10F2), # FW version for packing new HI centrality variables
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@apana @rekovic sorry but is this change backward compatible? This fragment is used by top level configurations for many purposes, not just HI. In all the other updates in this PR I see just addition of pieces, which I would assume is backward compatible.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FwId has increased, and the new version only adds records to pack, not remove any existing records, so should be backward compatible.

@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-25064/31387/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 32
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2994843
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 24
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2994622
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 197
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 31 files compared)
  • Checked 134 log files, 14 edm output root files, 32 DQM output files

@Martin-Grunewald
Copy link
Contributor

Martin-Grunewald commented Oct 31, 2018

All these new event variables are stored in the already existing class DataFormats/L1Trigger/interface/EtSum.h, and the added enums flags what the actual variable is?

@Martin-Grunewald
Copy link
Contributor

Martin-Grunewald commented Oct 31, 2018

Comments:

  1. From the direct comments added by myself to the code changes, it is not clear to me whether some blocks are missing or named differently in different parts of the code changes (why?) in this PR, or if anything else is going on in terms of consistency within this PR

  2. It was reported by Jaebeom Park that the PR (in 103X) solves the problem he raised originally which led to an earlier and this PR, which is great!

  3. As alluded to above, in addition, these new variables should appear in the (HLT/TSG) trigger summary product. This is an additional feature, so this PR can already go in now without waiting for the fix to the trigger summary.

To figure out what is needed for the trigger summary, I need more clarifications, especially on the question:
Are all (10? 12? more?) these new event variables stored in/using the already existing class DataFormats/L1Trigger/interface/EtSum.h, and the added enums are there to flag what the actual meaning of the variable stored is?

@rekovic
Copy link
Contributor

rekovic commented Oct 31, 2018

Hi @Martin-Grunewald.

  1. I believe that @apana covered all the types of L1Triggers that were missing in DataFormats/HLTReco/interface/TriggerTypeDefs.h , some missing from before and some missing now for 2018 HI, by adding the below. These are then used to label the products (seeds) stored in the HLTL1TSeed filter. I don't think that there is any inconsistency there. I imagine that the problem was not noticed before as none of these types were used in HLT seeding before.
     TriggerL1Centrality   =-102,
    TriggerL1MinBiasHFP0  =-103,
    TriggerL1MinBiasHFM0  =-104,
    TriggerL1MinBiasHFP1  =-105,
    TriggerL1MinBiasHFM1  =-106,
    TriggerL1TotalEtEm    =-107,
    TriggerL1MissingHtHF  =-108,
    TriggerL1TowerCount   =-109,
    TriggerL1AsymEt       =-110,
    TriggerL1AsymHt       =-111,
    TriggerL1AsymEtHF     =-112,
    TriggerL1AsymHtHF     =-113,

In addition, some of these types, but lesser number, were also missing from DataFormats/L1TGlobal/src/GlobalObject.cc (for example TowerCount used in 2017 HI run, was already implemented).

  1. Yes. The HI checked that the HLTL1TSeed with DiMuon+Centrality triggers is now fine.

  2. I agree that the work on TriggerSummary can be postponed. Yes, the added enums are flagging the new types of L1 EtSums.

@rekovic
Copy link
Contributor

rekovic commented Oct 31, 2018

+1

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

For the record, discussing with @Martin-Grunewald the TriggeSummary will have to be update after 10_3_1 (if this has to be done on 1 day time scale). It might imply an update of the event content, to be clarified

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

@Martin-Grunewald if you have no doubts on this PR in itself, are you ready to sign it so as we can proceed with the integration in view of 10_3_1/
And of course also the 10_3_X back-port needs to be approved (also for L1 @rekovic )

@Martin-Grunewald
Copy link
Contributor

I would have wished @apana to comment also.

@Martin-Grunewald
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 1, 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 Nov 1, 2018

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 11d5121 into cms-sw:master Nov 1, 2018
@apana
Copy link
Contributor Author

apana commented Nov 2, 2018

Hi Martin,

I'm sorry I didn't reply back. I had thought Vladimir answer was sufficient, but in the future I will reply back to make sure. Do you still have any questions? Also, please let me know if you want me to look into updating the TriggerSummary code.

@Martin-Grunewald
Copy link
Contributor

Hi Len,

If you look at my specific commenst on the code changes, you see that I am worried that not all the new variables have been added in all locations, as the number of "blocks" added varies.
I interpret Vladimir's feedback as just an assertion/assumption, but you as code author should actually verify - why do you add differently many things in the different locations? And why under different names?

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

5 participants