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

introduce SiPhase2BadStrip format for phase-2 simulation #37397

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 5, 2022

Conversation

mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

@mmusich mmusich commented Mar 29, 2022

PR description:

The purpose of this PR is to adapt the current SiStripBadStrip infrastructure to accomodate the needs to simulate bad strips in the PS-s and SS modules of the Phase-2 Outer Tracker.

  • The existing CondFormat SiStripBadStrip is mostly fine to be used as a container of the bad strip data, though the decode and encode functions needed to be specialized as the total amount of strips in a phase-2 module (maximally = 2 cols*1016 rows) exceeds the total maximal amount of strips in the Phase-0 Strip tracker modules (6 APV * 128 = 728).
  • A new set of packing constants is introduced at DataFormats/SiStripCommon/interface/ConstantsForCondObjects.h and used in the decodePhase2 and encodePhase2 methods of SiStripBadStrip.
  • A new (dependent) record to hold the bad strip data is introduced (SiPhase2OuterTrackerBadStripRcd), together with a novel ESSource (SiPhase2BadStripConfigurableFakeESSource.cc) that delivers in said record, randomly generated SiStripBadStrip data with a configurable fraction of bad components (flatly distributed over all the detector).
  • This ESource is included in all existing Phase-2 geometries via the configuration fragment fakePhase2OuterTrackerConditions_cff, loaded in the various geometries, and it is at the moment configured in such a way that no bad components are simulated.
  • I add to this PR also sqlite file DB writers and readers in the CondTools/SiPhase2Tracker package, together with unit tests to test the payload writing and reading.

This PR is technical and no regressions to existing workflows are expected.

PR validation:

Performed following tests:

  • cmssw compiles;
  • scram b runtests runs fine;
  • runTheMatrix.py -l limited --ibeos runs fine;
  • privately generated samples with the different bad components fractions have been used to develop the corresponding changes in the Phase-2 Tracker digitizer to actually simulate the killing of the bad components. Such changes will be proposed as a separate PR by @suchandradutta once this one is merged.

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

N/A

cc: @emiglior @suchandradutta @tsusa

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-37397/29056

  • This PR adds an extra 72KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • CalibTracker/SiPhase2TrackerESProducers (upgrade, alca)
  • CondCore/SiPhase2TrackerPlugins (db)
  • CondFormats/DataRecord (db, alca)
  • CondFormats/SiStripObjects (db, alca)
  • CondTools/SiPhase2Tracker (upgrade, alca)
  • Configuration/Geometry (geometry, upgrade)
  • DataFormats/SiStripCommon (reconstruction)
  • SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Geometry (geometry, upgrade)

@malbouis, @civanch, @yuanchao, @ggovi, @makortel, @cvuosalo, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @Dr15Jones, @clacaputo, @slava77, @jpata, @tvami, @francescobrivio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@erikbutz, @swertz, @vargasa, @threus, @slomeo, @pieterdavid, @robervalwalsh, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @kpedro88, @tocheng, @mmusich, @echabert, @fabiocos, @seemasharmafnal, @alesaggio 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

@yuanchao
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild please test

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor

tvami commented Mar 29, 2022

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusich commented Mar 29, 2022

It also seems that the unit test is failing
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df6e37/23490/unitTests/src/Configuration/Geometry/test/test2026Geometry/testing.log

@cms-sw/upgrade-l2 can you comment what is missing there? I've updated the dict2026Geometry.py file, but seems it's not picked up for dd4hep cases.

===== Test "test2026Geometry" ====
GeometryDD4hepExtended2026D49_cff.py differs
GeometryDD4hepExtended2026D60_cff.py differs
GeometryDD4hepExtended2026D68_cff.py differs
GeometryDD4hepExtended2026D70_cff.py differs
GeometryDD4hepExtended2026D76_cff.py differs
GeometryDD4hepExtended2026D77_cff.py differs
GeometryDD4hepExtended2026D78_cff.py differs

---> test test2026Geometry had ERRORS
TestTime:1
^^^^ End Test test2026Geometry ^^^^

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-1

Failed Tests: UnitTests
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df6e37/23490/summary.html
COMMIT: 5151503
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_4_X_2022-03-29-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/37397/23490/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Unit Tests

I found errors in the following unit tests:

---> test test2026Geometry had ERRORS

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 2 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3585896
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 7
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3585866
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.004 KiB( 47 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 312.0 ): 0.004 KiB MessageLogger/Warnings
  • Checked 200 log files, 45 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df6e37/23558/summary.html
COMMIT: e068c85
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_4_X_2022-03-30-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/37397/23558/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: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3591311
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 2
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3591287
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 47 files compared)
  • Checked 200 log files, 45 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor

tvami commented Mar 31, 2022

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Mar 31, 2022

+reconstruction

  • reco changes are limited to new constants in DataFormats/SiStripCommon

@cvuosalo
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusich commented Apr 2, 2022

@cms-sw/upgrade-l2 please take a look and eventually sign, there are more PRs on this subject coming that depend on this entering the release (cf #37397 (comment)). Thank you!

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

srimanob commented Apr 3, 2022

+Upgrade

This PR introduces "fake" SiStripBadStrip Phase-2 Outer Tracker. There is no bad components are simulated yet, no change is expected on the Phase-2 wfs from this PR.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 3, 2022

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)

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusich commented Apr 5, 2022

kind ping for @cms-sw/orp-l2 for any residual comments (see #37397 (comment))

Copy link
Contributor

@perrotta perrotta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Don't mind to change it in this PR @mmusich , but since I noticed it while scrolling through the code I took a note

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

perrotta commented Apr 5, 2022

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 3bc834a into cms-sw:master Apr 5, 2022
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