-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.6k
Calo L1 last20Mismatches Axis Fix Forward Port #32816
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
Calo L1 last20Mismatches Axis Fix Forward Port #32816
Conversation
|
please test |
|
urgent |
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32816/21002
|
|
A new Pull Request was created by @aloeliger for master. It involves the following packages: DQM/L1TMonitor @andrius-k, @kmaeshima, @ErnestaP, @ahmad3213, @jfernan2, @rvenditti can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-727477/12711/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-32816/21022
|
|
Pull request #32816 was updated. @andrius-k, @kmaeshima, @ErnestaP, @ahmad3213, @cmsbuild, @jfernan2, @rvenditti can you please check and sign again. |
|
@silviodonato I think I have located the issue, a missing "&" (apologies it took me some time to understand and locate this), and the 25202.0 workflow plots look fixed in my test. Is there still in time to add this commit into 11_2_X and the MWGR? |
|
please test |
We can add the fix in 11_2_X at Online DQM at P5 for the GUI used by the shifters, as long as we have a PR, but I understand the fix affects mainly Offline for Tier0 |
@jfernan2, should I open up a new pull request to 11_2_X with this latest commit? |
|
|
Okay, I have opened a new PR to CMSSW_11_2_X with this fix as well. |
|
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-727477/12729/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
|
@aloeliger before and after |
This difference seems to be what was expected. I have removed duplicate events (and therefore labels) from the Y-axis. The PR version does not have duplicate events shown on the Y-axis, instead only reporting each one once, alongside all types of mismatches seen, instead of reporting every mismatch individually. The current version shows multiple copies of Run 274199, Lumi 21, Event 39733340, alongside multiple reports of the same kind of mismatch. Comparing between the two, it does not seem like the current PR version of this monitoring element has missed any kinds of mismatches (the previous problem seen on 25202.0), nor does it seem to be reporting mismatches that were not seen. |
|
+1 |
|
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. @silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
|
+1 |


PR description:
This PR modifies the function of the last20Mismatches monitoring element to not include duplicate event mismatch reports on the Y-axis, instead just updating the types of mismatches seen for a given combination of Run, Lumi, and Event. As well, empty Y-axis labels are now simply given their corresponding bin number, to prevent empty string labels causing issues as seen before in #32250. This PR fixes the issue first spotted on this hypernews thread: https://hypernews.cern.ch/HyperNews/CMS/get/tier0-Ops/2192.html
PR validation:
All code compiles, and produces expected plots as seen when using
runTheMatrix.py. Using @silviodonato 's method to test the DQM merging step, this code eliminates the merging error seen.if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
This PR is a forward port to the master branch / 11_3_X of #32815. It was created by
git cherry-pick-ing the three relevant commits on top of the current state of the master branch. This fix needs to be ported to be available in future production instances of CaloL1 DQM code.