bugfix XML for PPS strips mapping

[grzanka]

PR description:

PR fixes a wrong comment tag in the XML mapping for the PPS silicon strips
Only now we could run the DAQ on the PPS detectors with silicon strips, so we couldn't spot it before,

PR validation:

relvals 136.793

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

no

[grzanka]

@vavati FYI

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-37498/29200

• This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @grzanka (Leszek Grzanka) for master.

It involves the following packages:

• CondFormats/PPSObjects (alca)

@cmsbuild, @malbouis, @tvami, @yuanchao, @francescobrivio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@mmusich, @tocheng, @seemasharmafnal 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

[tvami]

type bug-fix

[tvami]

Hi @grzanka does 136.793 really test this change? Based on what you wrote it doesnt really, otherwise it would have been spotted. Seems to me nothing tests this code, no?

[grzanka]

Hi @grzanka does 136.793 really test this change? Based on what you wrote it doesnt really, otherwise it would have been spotted. Seems to me nothing tests this code, no?

I ran 136.793 to check if it doesn't break anything else.

[tvami]

@cmsbuild , please test

[tvami]

urgent

• backport is in 12_3_X

[tvami]

Hi @grzanka does 136.793 really test this change? Based on what you wrote it doesnt really, otherwise it would have been spotted. Seems to me nothing tests this code, no?

I ran 136.793 to check if it doesn't break anything else.

OK, it would be nice to have a unit test for this

[vavati]

For the time being we have only Minidaq runs...like this
/eos/cms/store/t0streamer/Minidaq/A/000/350/029/run350029_ls0001_streamA_StorageManager.dat

[tvami]

+alca

• modifies only comments, nothing in CMSSW tests this, it's urgent to have the backport in 12_3_X

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs after it passes the integration tests. 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)

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3de855/23740/summary.html
COMMIT: fa91be7
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_4_X_2022-04-07-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/37498/23740/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: 10 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3593039
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 2
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3593015
• 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

[perrotta]

There are indeed quite large differences in the totemRPRawToDigi_TrackingStrip distributions (0 entries vs large number of entries) in wf 138.4 and 139.001 (2021 MinBias). Could anybody have a look and explain the differences?

[vavati]

The bug in xml caused the daq mapping not be uploaded and then all corresponding digi were not created.
If I interpret correctly wf 138.4 and 139.001 correspond to run=346512, where there are no PPS or Totem detectors in DAQ
(from oms=
Components | CSC, DAQ, DCS, DQM, DT, ECAL, GEM, HCAL, L1SCOUT, PIXEL, RPC, TCDS, TRACKER, TRG)
I assume that anyway these distributions are empty.

[qliphy]

+1
totemRPRawToDigi_TrackingStrip distributions should be empty as commented above

[perrotta]

@vavati before merging the backport PR for 12_3, could you please verify in the root outputs of these tests whether those Totem distributions are really empty, as you are assuming? (Maybe they are just filled with zero's, as the entries in the root outputs are there)