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

Addition of saturated flag in SiStrip Approximate Clusters #38870

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Aug 5, 2022

Conversation

abaty
Copy link
Contributor

@abaty abaty commented Jul 27, 2022

This PR slightly extends the SiStripApproximateCluster data format to include a boolean flag which marks clusters which are saturated. This change was motivated by the discussion at [1]. The definition of 'saturated' we use here is the same as what is used in the SubClusterShapeFilter, i.e. a cluster having 3 consecutive strips of ADC>=254. Note that this flag is not currently used in the reconstruction sequence; this PR is simply to ensure this information is not dropped in the new approx. cluster data format. This is expected to increase the approximate cluster collection size by ~1% and barely affect the timing performance [2].

[1] #38423 (comment)
[2] https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/Main/HIDetectorReadout2020/SaturatedStrips.pdf

PR validation:

This PR was tested by running workflow 140.58 step 2, and checking the approximated cluster collection in the output.

@mandrenguyen @icali

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-38870/31290

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @abaty for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • DataFormats/SiStripCluster (reconstruction)
  • RecoLocalTracker/SiStripClusterizer (reconstruction)

@jpata, @cmsbuild, @clacaputo can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@echabert, @VourMa, @swertz, @robervalwalsh, @yduhm, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @rovere, @gbenelli, @alesaggio, @threus, @felicepantaleo, @gpetruc, @mmusich, @VinInn, @mtosi this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Jul 27, 2022

test parameters:

  • workflow = 140.58

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Jul 27, 2022

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-4cbff4/26484/summary.html
COMMIT: ecc1619
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_5_X_2022-07-27-1100/el8_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/38870/26484/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

  • /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-4cbff4/140.58_RunHI2018+RunHI2018+RAWPRIMEHI18+RECOHID18APPROXCLUSTERS+HARVESTDHI18

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 52
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3728935
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 2
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3728911
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 51 files compared)
  • Checked 214 log files, 47 edm output root files, 52 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

<class name="SiStripApproximateCluster" ClassVersion="3">
<version ClassVersion="3" checksum="2041370183"/>
<class name="SiStripApproximateCluster" ClassVersion="9">
<version ClassVersion="9" checksum="2854791577"/>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why did it jump from 3 -> 9?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have updated this file to be version '4' now.

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Aug 2, 2022

The size increase overall seems negligible, so once the class version is sorted out, it's good to go from my side.

140.58, 500 events, file size in bytes
step2.root: 2553402430 -> 2559880253
step3.root: 1159401041 -> 1159380736

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 4, 2022

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-38870/31416

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 4, 2022

Pull request #38870 was updated. @jpata, @cmsbuild, @clacaputo can you please check and sign again.

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Aug 4, 2022

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 4, 2022

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-4cbff4/26637/summary.html
COMMIT: 26931c1
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_5_X_2022-08-03-2300/el8_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/38870/26637/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

  • /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-4cbff4/140.58_RunHI2018+RunHI2018+RAWPRIMEHI18+RECOHID18APPROXCLUSTERS+HARVESTDHI18

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 52
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3752952
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 2
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3752928
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 51 files compared)
  • Checked 216 log files, 49 edm output root files, 52 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Aug 5, 2022

+reconstruction

  • changes the SiStrip approximate cluster dataformat for HI
  • file size increase is minimal
  • no reco changes

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Aug 5, 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, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@qliphy
Copy link
Contributor

qliphy commented Aug 5, 2022

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit eb2d3a5 into cms-sw:master Aug 5, 2022
<class name="SiStripApproximateCluster" ClassVersion="3">
<version ClassVersion="3" checksum="2041370183"/>
<class name="SiStripApproximateCluster" ClassVersion="4">
<version ClassVersion="4" checksum="2854791577"/>
Copy link
Contributor

@makortel makortel Aug 5, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This should have kept the checksum for class version 3 in addition of 4.

Copy link
Contributor

@jpata jpata Aug 8, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks Matti. Is there a way to detect this at compile time (or in the tests)?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nothing straightforward comes to my mind, but maybe we could figure out something. A specific check would certainly help to catch such cases. Could you open an issue about it?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done! #39008

jpata added a commit to jpata/cmssw that referenced this pull request Aug 8, 2022
As pointed out by @makortel cms-sw#38870 (comment), we forgot to keep the old class version in cms-sw#38870.
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

6 participants