-
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
CPPF DQM modules backport to 12_4_X #40258
Conversation
bugfix bugfix remove commented lines add L1TStage2CPPF cfi clear comments code-checks and format LogInfo to Warning remove couts src to plugins clang format
A new Pull Request was created by @zhangcg123 for CMSSW_12_4_X. It involves the following packages:
@epalencia, @micsucmed, @emanueleusai, @ahmad3213, @cmsbuild, @rekovic, @jfernan2, @clacaputo, @syuvivida, @pmandrik, @mandrenguyen, @cecilecaillol, @rvenditti can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
Please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-fe6a87/29507/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
@@ -143,6 +143,8 @@ void RPCCPPFUnpacker::processRXRecord(RPCAMCLink link, | |||
LogDebug("RPCCPPFRawToDigi") << "RXRecord " << std::hex << record.getRecord() << std::dec << std::endl; | |||
unsigned int fed(link.getFED()); | |||
unsigned int amc_number(link.getAMCNumber()); | |||
if (record.getLink() > 80) |
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'm not sure reco needs to have much input here, but would it be useful to add some comments to explain what these kind of numbers correspond to?
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.
Please take a look at #39307. We have already discussed this https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/39307#issuecomment-1237042992
I quoted a wrong issue number in this PR description, fixed it already.
Best,
For my own education what use case is this PR actually targeting? As far as I am aware data-taking in 12.4.X is over and the release for 2022 re-reco is already frozen, so there seems to be no practical use case for this backport. |
Hi @mmusich , |
As discussed and agreed with DQM and all other groups present at the ORP meeting on Dec 13, we can now close this PR (which will never be merged in the offline release anyhow) and clean up a bit our queues |
PR description:
Add CPPF online DQM modules L1TdeStage2CPPF and L1TStage2CPPF.
By comparing the CPPF emulator and unpacker outputs and putting some comparison histograms on the CMS online DQM GUI, shifters can monitor the status of the CPPF hardware.
PR validation:
cmsRun DQM/Integration/python/clients/l1tstage2emulator_dqm_sourceclient-live_cfg.py unitTest=True
If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:
Backport of #38564 and #39307. For CPPF online DQM