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

Modify RPC and GEM unpacker blocks in EMTF unpacker to match the new Run 3 format #39388

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 15, 2022

Conversation

eyigitba
Copy link
Contributor

@eyigitba eyigitba commented Sep 14, 2022

PR description:

This PR implements the necessary changes to unpack the new DAQ format that is implemented at P5 a couple of weeks ago. Our tests show that the new DAQ format significantly reduces EMTF dead time at very high PU scenarios. According to the new format 2 RPC (GEM) TPs are packed into 1 RPC (GEM) data block, thus reducing the total number of blocks in EMTF DAQ stream.

Modified EMTFBlockGEM.cc, EMTFBlockRPC.cc to add functionality to create 2 TPs per block depending on the firmware version. Changes in EMTFSetup.cc are made to pass firmware version to the RPC and GEM block unpackers.

A backport of this PR to 12_4_X and 12_5_X is required for upcoming collision runs.

PR validation:

Tested with unpacking data collected last week and running l1tstage2_dqm_sourceclient-live_cfg.py to confirm the DQM plots are as expected.

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:

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-39388/32092

  • This PR adds an extra 20KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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

It involves the following packages:

  • EventFilter/L1TRawToDigi (l1)

@epalencia, @cmsbuild, @cecilecaillol, @rekovic can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@dinyar, @missirol, @thomreis, @Martin-Grunewald this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@cecilecaillol
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@epalencia
Copy link
Contributor

Please test

@rovere
Copy link
Contributor

rovere commented Sep 14, 2022

Since this is needed for data taking after TS1 and LHC recovery, please open a backport to 12_4 and 12_5.
On top of that, to make it even more explicit that this is needed for the coming data-taking, please mark the 12_4 backport as urgent.

Marco(ORM)

@eyigitba
Copy link
Contributor Author

urgent

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-36c7f7/27531/summary.html
COMMIT: 1844fd0
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_6_X_2022-09-13-2300/el8_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/39388/27531/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 51
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3618326
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 5
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3618299
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 50 files compared)
  • Checked 212 log files, 49 edm output root files, 51 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@cecilecaillol
Copy link
Contributor

+l1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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

@@ -55,6 +55,15 @@ namespace l1t {
uint16_t RPCc = payload[2];
uint16_t RPCd = payload[3];

// Run 3 has a different EMTF DAQ output format since August 26th
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What is the purpose of this commented out block? Please either add a comment which explains its usage, or remove it

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This was my bad. I forgot to remove that part :). Should be fixed now

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #39388 was updated. @epalencia, @cmsbuild, @cecilecaillol, @rekovic can you please check and sign again.

@cecilecaillol
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cecilecaillol
Copy link
Contributor

+l1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs after it passes the integration tests. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-36c7f7/27550/summary.html
COMMIT: 664c88a
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_6_X_2022-09-14-2300/el8_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/39388/27550/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 6 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 51
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3618326
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 11
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3618293
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 50 files compared)
  • Checked 212 log files, 49 edm output root files, 51 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit f3954b5 into cms-sw:master Sep 15, 2022
@cmsbuild cmsbuild mentioned this pull request Sep 15, 2022
@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

@eyigitba I am notincing now that this PR reverts the protections previously added with #38961: is it wanted, or simply you developed in 12_4_X (where that PR was never backported) and copied blindly the same files in 12_5_X and 12_6_X?

I'm holding the backports until this issue is addressed

@eyigitba
Copy link
Contributor Author

@perrotta I can see the protections are still there at https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/39388/files#diff-1a6dadb65e6c79d8a2fc124b34a859b8e8536d39e2cdfea6d7d9f05eba4a3bddR262-R269

Are you talking about these?

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

Ah, ok, thank you for having checked. The confusion was caused by the fact that PR #38961 was never backported in 12_4_X, as its modifications are only there in 12_5_X and 12_6_X

That PR adds the protections in the following files:

  • EventFilter/L1TRawToDigi/plugins/implementations_stage2/EMTFBlockGEM.cc (*)
  • EventFilter/L1TRawToDigi/plugins/implementations_stage2/EMTFBlockME.cc
  • EventFilter/L1TRawToDigi/plugins/implementations_stage2/EMTFBlockRPC.cc (*)
  • EventFilter/L1TRawToDigi/plugins/implementations_stage2/EMTFBlockSP.cc

The backport of this PR adds those protections in EMTFBlockGEM.cc and EMTFBlockRPC.cc, but as such there is no protection for EMTFBlockME.cc and EMTFBlockSP.cc

I think that they could also be needed in 12_4_X, and therefore a partial backport of #38961 with what's missing should be prepared for 12_4_X: @eyigitba what do you think?

@eyigitba
Copy link
Contributor Author

@perrotta I think that's a good point. I can prepare a partial backport of #38961.

These protections were only made to protect the DQM code from out-of-range BX values that happened in 2021. The DQM PR is not in 12_4_X, so it's probably not urgent. But it's good to have anyway for consistency

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.

6 participants