Removing obsolete code from CaloLayer1Setup

[BenjaminRS]

PR description:

This PR removes obsolete code from the CaloLayer1 area which has been causing spurious elog warnings as described in Issue#34309. As suggested in this comment to PR#35873 I have removed the if else statement which was now obsolete.

[cmsbuild]

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35940/26341

• This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

  • File EventFilter/L1TRawToDigi/plugins/implementations_stage2/CaloLayer1Setup.cc modified in PR(s): remove message from unexpected CTP7 firmware ID #35873

Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)

• code-format:
  https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35940/26341/code-format.patch
  e.g. curl -k https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35940/26341/code-format.patch | patch -p1
  You can also run scram build code-format to apply code format directly

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35940/26344

• This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

  • File EventFilter/L1TRawToDigi/plugins/implementations_stage2/CaloLayer1Setup.cc modified in PR(s): remove message from unexpected CTP7 firmware ID #35873

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @BenjaminRS (Benjamin Radburn-Smith) for master.

It involves the following packages:

• EventFilter/L1TRawToDigi (l1)

@cmsbuild, @rekovic, @cecilecaillol can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@dinyar, @missirol, @thomreis, @Martin-Grunewald this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[perrotta]

urgent

[perrotta]

please test with #35941,#35921

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-bcb20f/20180/summary.html
COMMIT: 5b23e38
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_2_X_2021-11-01-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/35940/20180/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 8 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 42
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2901890
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 6
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2901861
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: -0.004 KiB( 41 files compared)
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 312.0 ): -0.004 KiB MessageLogger/Warnings
• Checked 177 log files, 37 edm output root files, 42 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[rekovic]

+1

[cmsbuild]

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. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[qliphy]

@BenjaminRS Should this be backported to 12_0_X to replace #35877?

[BenjaminRS]

Hi @qliphy - this can be backported to replace the previous PR if you wish; however @perrotta mentioned in this comment that the backport with the other solution can remain. Which is the preferred course of action?

[qliphy]

Hi @qliphy - this can be backported to replace the previous PR if you wish; however @perrotta mentioned in this comment that the backport with the other solution can remain. Which is the preferred course of action?

@BenjaminRS Fine with me with the proposal from @perrotta as for 12_0_X

[tvami]

@BenjaminRS can I also ask you to include "CaloLayer1Setup" in the PR title? It's best to have the PR titles as descriptive as possible.

[BenjaminRS]

Hi @tvami -- sorry for that, I didn't realise it was so easy to change :)

[perrotta]

+1

• Thank you @BenjaminRS: let merge this one in the master, for now
• Then for the backport we can stick with the "simple solution" already submitted