-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-38870/31290
|
A new Pull Request was created by @abaty for master. It involves the following packages:
@jpata, @cmsbuild, @clacaputo can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
test parameters:
|
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-4cbff4/26484/summary.html Comparison Summary@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Summary:
|
<class name="SiStripApproximateCluster" ClassVersion="3"> | ||
<version ClassVersion="3" checksum="2041370183"/> | ||
<class name="SiStripApproximateCluster" ClassVersion="9"> | ||
<version ClassVersion="9" checksum="2854791577"/> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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.
The size increase overall seems negligible, so once the class version is sorted out, it's good to go from my side.
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-38870/31416
|
Pull request #38870 was updated. @jpata, @cmsbuild, @clacaputo can you please check and sign again. |
@cmsbuild please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-4cbff4/26637/summary.html Comparison Summary@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Summary:
|
+reconstruction
|
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) |
+1 |
<class name="SiStripApproximateCluster" ClassVersion="3"> | ||
<version ClassVersion="3" checksum="2041370183"/> | ||
<class name="SiStripApproximateCluster" ClassVersion="4"> | ||
<version ClassVersion="4" checksum="2854791577"/> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
done! #39008
As pointed out by @makortel cms-sw#38870 (comment), we forgot to keep the old class version in cms-sw#38870.
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