Hot Strip algorithm updated

[suchandradutta]

Updating Hot Strip algorithms in CalibTracker/SiStripQuality putting extra requirement on the strip Digi wrt APV median as developed by Mario Galanti + Message logger ourput made more logical in DQMOffline/CalibTracker/plugins/SiStripQualityHotStripIdentifierRoot.cc

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @suchandradutta (Suchandra Dutta) for CMSSW_7_4_X.

Hot Strip algorithm updated

It involves the following packages:

CalibTracker/SiStripQuality
DQMOffline/CalibTracker

@diguida, @danduggan, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @deguio, @mmusich can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@jlagram, @venturia, @threus, @gbenelli, @rociovilar this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[mmusich]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[deguio]

+1

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: a9aad99
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9984/10772/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_4_X IBs once checked with relvals in the development release cycle of CMSSW (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[mmusich]

@gbenelli @suchandradutta it might be worth to test the PCL workflow in 76X where the PR is already merged and show that everything looks ok as expected before merging for production. It should be included in the test WF 1001.0 in the matrix.

[suchandradutta]

I have used runTheMatrix.py with WF 1001.0 in 76X IB. The work flow went through without any problem. But the actual algorithm did not trigger due to too few events.

[mmusich]

@suchandradutta thanks. This was expected since the test is run automatically in from cms-bot. I was referring to repeating the steps with more statistics (you can customize the cmsDriver command) to see it actually triggers the calibration and compare the payload you obtain with your expectations. Thanks.

[suchandradutta]

@mmusich after running the default work flow with 100 events, I did try it with 10000 events. But I saw that the DQM file produced after step4 was basically empty. I am trying it out again.

Anyway I have tested the algorithm (with and without new addition) in 74X using ALCAPrompt dataset of recent runs and verified that it works.

[suchandradutta]

@mmusich my statement was not correct! Using work flow 1001.1 in runTheMatrix in the IB CMSSW_7_6_X_2015-07-08-2300 (out of the box) I do not get any sub-system folders in the DQM file (after step 4 harvesting). So even if I get following message at the end of my test

1 1 1 1 tests passed, 0 0 0 0 failed
the test is not successful!

[davidlange6]

+1