add a unit test for convertToRaw

[mmusich]

PR description:

This is a follow-up to #44735 in particular to the comment:

(It would be good to add a unit test for this utility, but I currently do not have enough time to implement a proper one, and I would not delay this fix.)

add a basic unit test for the convertToRaw utility.

PR validation:

scram b runtests_testConvertToRaw runs fine.

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:

N/A

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-44771/39991

• This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

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

It involves the following packages:

• HLTrigger/Tools (hlt)

@mmusich, @cmsbuild, @Martin-Grunewald can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@missirol, @silviodonato, @Martin-Grunewald, @fwyzard this is something you requested to watch as well.
@antoniovilela, @sextonkennedy, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mmusich]

@cmsbuild, please test

[missirol]

Thank you @mmusich !

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-44771/39993

• This PR adds an extra 12KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #44771 was updated. @Martin-Grunewald, @cmsbuild, @mmusich can you please check and sign again.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-44771/39995

• This PR adds an extra 12KB to repository

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #44771 was updated. @smorovic, @mmusich, @emeschi, @Martin-Grunewald, @cmsbuild can you please check and sign again.

[mmusich]

@cmsbuild, please test

[smuzaffar]

By the way , @smorovic, the only place RawEventFileWriterForBU::initialize(....) is called is from https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/EventFilter/Utilities/plugins/RawEventOutputModuleForBU.h . So not why change RawEventFileWriterForBU::initialize() signature and pass edm::Service<evf::EvFDaqDirector>()->getRunNumber() to it instead of extrating the run number from the destinationDir

[smorovic]

By the way , @@smorovic, the only place RawEventFileWriterForBU::initialize(....) is called is from https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/EventFilter/Utilities/plugins/RawEventOutputModuleForBU.h . So why change not RawEventFileWriterForBU::initialize() signature and pass edm::Service<evf::EvFDaqDirector>()->getRunNumber() to it instead of extrating the run number from the destinationDir

I agree, it could also be done in this way (DaqDirector should know run number as well, even in "BU" mode).

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-44a4e8/38987/summary.html
COMMIT: 10cbf1f
CMSSW: CMSSW_14_1_X_2024-04-22-1100/el8_amd64_gcc12
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/44771/38987/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially removed 2 lines from the logs
• Reco comparison results: 37 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3319852
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3319829
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 47 files compared)
• Checked 202 log files, 165 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[mmusich]

I agree, it could also be done in this way (DaqDirector should know run number as well, even in "BU" mode).

I would leave that to a further update from DAQ experts and make this PR as the minimal changeset to allow running the new unit test.

[smorovic]

+1

[mmusich]

+hlt

[cmsbuild]

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. @sextonkennedy, @rappoccio, @antoniovilela (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[rappoccio]

+1