-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
[14_0_X] Remove unpackLayer1 option from L1REPACK:Full #43985
[14_0_X] Remove unpackLayer1 option from L1REPACK:Full #43985
Conversation
A new Pull Request was created by @eyigitba for CMSSW_14_0_X. It involves the following packages:
@cmsbuild, @fabiocos, @davidlange6, @rappoccio, @antoniovilela can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
cms-bot internal usage |
please test |
-1 Failed Tests: UnitTests Unit TestsI found 1 errors in the following unit tests: ---> test test-das-selected-lumis had ERRORS Comparison SummarySummary:
|
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-4aa312/37515/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
Hi, can @cms-sw/operations-l2 have a look at this PR and merge it as well? The main PR was merged last week. Thanks! |
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_14_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_14_1_X is complete. This pull request will be automatically merged. |
PR description:
This PR removes the
unpackLayer1
fromL1REPACK:Full
. This was brought into our attention by TSG colleagues and it was causing unrealistic rates when re-emulating data after 2023A.There might be an underlying reason to why this problem started happening, but for the time being we prefer to remove this option and use
unpackHcal
directly. This is more in line with how ECAL TPs are used. TheunpackLayer1
step was probably an artifact from Run 2, which is not needed anymore.PR validation:
Validated that the
L1REPACK:Full
workflows still work after the change and the rates obtained 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:
Backport of #43981
FYI @missirol @savarghe @caruta @aloeliger @epalencia