Fixes for SiStripCalCosmicsNano

[robervalwalsh]

PR description:

• Removed lumi section selection from step RunCosmics2021 that is not necessary and yields a DAS_ERROR. when running the step
• Removed redundant seqALCARECOSiStripCalCosmics from pathALCARECOSiStripCalCosmicsNano. It prevents error when running the step ALCA:SiStripCalCosmicsNano on existing SiStripCalCosmics samples.

PR validation:

For both commits

runTheMatrix.py -l 138.1,138.2 -i all

Running step ALCA:SiStripCalCosmicsNano on existing SiStripCalCosmics sample:

cmsDriver.py step3nano \
--conditions 123X_dataRun3_Prompt_v3 \
--datatier ALCARECO \
--eventcontent ALCARECO \
--scenario cosmics \
-s ALCA:SiStripCalCosmicsNano \
--era Run3 \
-n 100 \
--filein  /store/data/Commissioning2021/Cosmics/ALCARECO/SiStripCalCosmics-PromptReco-v1/000/346/514/00000/55e45b5c-3abf-41c7-8938-ef79d26ab8be.root \
--customise=CalibTracker/SiStripCommon/customiseAlCaNano.flatSiStripCalCosmicsNano \
--customise_commands="process.ALCARECOStreamSiStripCalCosmicsNano.fileName = cms.untracked.string('calibTreeNano_run346514.root')"

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

N/A

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-37060/28510

• This PR adds an extra 56KB to repository

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_steps.py modified in PR(s): AlCaLumiPixelsCountsExpress and AlCaLumiPixelsCountsPrompt PCL and PromptReco  #36952

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @robervalwalsh (Roberval Walsh) for master.

It involves the following packages:

• Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (pdmv, upgrade)
• Configuration/StandardSequences (operations)

@perrotta, @jordan-martins, @bbilin, @wajidalikhan, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @kskovpen, @qliphy, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@fabiocos, @makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @kpedro88, @lecriste, @mtosi, @ebrondol, @mmusich, @dgulhan, @slomeo this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mmusich]

test parameters:

• workflows = 7.2, 7.21, 7.22, 7.23, 7.24, 7.3, 7.4, 134.813, 136.733, 138.1, 138.2

[mmusich]

@cmsbuild, please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-041956/22666/summary.html
COMMIT: 37e8f36
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_3_X_2022-02-24-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/37060/22666/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

• /pool/condor/dir_171205/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-041956/134.813_RunCosmics2015C+RunCosmics2015C+RECOCOSDRUN2+ALCACOSDRUN2+HARVESTDCRUN2
• /pool/condor/dir_171205/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-041956/136.733_RunCosmics2016B+RunCosmics2016B+RECOCOSDRUN2+ALCACOSDRUN2+HARVESTDCRUN2
• /pool/condor/dir_171205/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-041956/138.1_PromptCosmics+RunCosmics2021+RECOCOSDPROMPTRUN3+ALCACOSDPROMPTRUN3+HARVESTDCPROMPTRUN3
• /pool/condor/dir_171205/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-041956/138.2_ExpressCosmics+RunCosmics2021+RECOCOSDEXPRUN3+ALCACOSDEXPRUN3+HARVESTDCEXPRUN3
• /pool/condor/dir_171205/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-041956/7.21_Cosmics_UP17+Cosmics_UP17+DIGICOS_UP17+RECOCOS_UP17+ALCACOS_UP17+HARVESTCOS_UP17
• /pool/condor/dir_171205/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-041956/7.22_Cosmics_UP16+Cosmics_UP16+DIGICOS_UP16+RECOCOS_UP16+ALCACOS_UP16+HARVESTCOS_UP16
• /pool/condor/dir_171205/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-041956/7.23_Cosmics_UP21+Cosmics_UP21+DIGICOS_UP21+RECOCOS_UP21+ALCACOS_UP21+HARVESTCOS_UP21
• /pool/condor/dir_171205/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-041956/7.24_Cosmics_UP21_0T+Cosmics_UP21_0T+DIGICOS_UP21_0T+RECOCOS_UP21_0T+ALCACOS_UP21_0T+HARVESTCOS_UP21_0T

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 49
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 4001143
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 8
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 4001113
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 48 files compared)
• Checked 204 log files, 45 edm output root files, 49 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[srimanob]

Hi @robervalwalsh
Do I understand the PR description correctly that you will always run ALCA:SiStripCalCosmicsNano on top of seqALCARECOSiStripCalCosmics?

[robervalwalsh]

Hi @robervalwalsh
Do I understand the PR description correctly that you will always run ALCA:SiStripCalCosmicsNano on top of seqALCARECOSiStripCalCosmics?

Hi @srimanob,
Yes

[srimanob]

type bug-fix

[srimanob]

+Upgrade

[mmusich]

Yes

what about the possible future Tier-0 case? SiStripCalCosmicsNano explicitly consumes SiStripCalCosmics event products e.g.:

cmssw/Calibration/TkAlCaRecoProducers/python/ALCARECOSiStripCalCosmicsNano_cff.py

Line 18 in 9624bb7

ALCARECOSiStripCalCosmicsNanoCalibTracks = CalibrationTracks.clone(src=cms.InputTag("ALCARECOSiStripCalCosmics"))

N.B.: I am not saying what is proposed here's not correct, just that SiStripCalCosmicsNano should never be run in central sequences unless SiStripCalCosmics is present as well after this change.
Taggin @cms-sw/alca-l2 for their knowledge.

[robervalwalsh]

N.B.: I am not saying what is proposed here's not correct, just that SiStripCalCosmicsNano should never be run in central sequences unless SiStripCalCosmics is present as well after this change. Taggin @cms-sw/alca-l2 for their knowledge.

I agree that should be case. The problem I faced was to run SiStripCalCosmicsNano on existing SiStripCalCosmics samples, without running all the steps, as I described in the cmsDriver command in the PR description.

[srimanob]

Should this PR get in?
Ping @cms-sw/pdmv-l2

[kskovpen]

+pdmv

[perrotta]

+operations

[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. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[perrotta]

+1