Backport for Totem T2, to be used in the special run at 25.6, consisting of #41472 , #41777 and #41859

[oljemark]

PR description:

For the TOTEM special foreseen on 25.6.2023, the new T2 telescope will be used (and removed after the run) to measure inelastic rate and veto diffractive p+p collisions, when measuring the elastic p+p cross section.

This is a backport of three PR's: PR #41472 introduced 2-channel unpacking for T2, PR #41777 included T2 DQM plots additions and fixes, and PR #41859 added the T2 to the online DQM calibration path, but was descoped from including T2 RecHit reconstruction and use in DQM since some relVals were failing with "Deleting previous geometry: cmsMagneticField:MAGF/Detector" at the step where the T2 XML geometry was read in; this is possibly similar to issue #33203 (see discussion here: #41859 (comment) ).
After the descoping, T2 Digis are successfully saved in the event and used to produce Digi-based DQM plots in common reconstruction with the rest of the PPS detectors. An additional fourth PR with final DQM plot updates is being prepared for submission to master this weekend, that will also be backported to 13_0_X.

This backport is for a special TOTEM release to be ready for testing start of next week (#41859 (comment)).

PR validation:

T2 & PPS unit tests were run successfully, as were several PPS workflows and a few relVals that had failed with the geometry error noted above, before descoping of PR #41859 .

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:

This is a backport to 13_0_X for a special TOTEM release, consisting of three recent Totem T2 PRs: #41472 , #41777 & #41859 .

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @oljemark for CMSSW_13_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

• CalibPPS/ESProducers (alca)
• CondFormats/PPSObjects (alca)
• DQM/CTPPS (dqm)
• DataFormats/TotemReco (reconstruction)
• EventFilter/CTPPSRawToDigi (reconstruction)
• RecoPPS/Configuration (reconstruction)
• RecoPPS/Local (reconstruction)

@micsucmed, @nothingface0, @emanueleusai, @clacaputo, @tvami, @cmsbuild, @saumyaphor4252, @pmandrik, @syuvivida, @tjavaid, @mandrenguyen, @francescobrivio, @rvenditti can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@fabferro, @rovere, @Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @tocheng, @grzanka, @mmusich, @forthommel, @seemasharmafnal 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

• Backported from New T2 multi-channel payload unpacker for special TOTEM run in June #41472

[mandrenguyen]

backport of #41472
#41777 and #41859
Are we also going to backport this to 13_1_X?

[mandrenguyen]

type ctpps

[mandrenguyen]

please test

[perrotta]

Are we also going to backport this to 13_1_X?

To be decided. We either

• build a dedicated release for the Totem run, in a separate brach off 13_0_X (in this case no backport to 13_1_X will be needed)
• or merge in the main 13_0_X (in which case a backport to 13_1_X will also be needed, to allow continuity through the release cycles)

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-54d15c/33078/summary.html
COMMIT: 6e281d4
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_0_X_2023-06-09-2300/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/41916/33078/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially added 269 lines to the logs
• ROOTFileChecks: Some differences in event products or their sizes found
• Reco comparison results: 1 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 49
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3315916
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3315893
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 48 files compared)
• Checked 213 log files, 164 edm output root files, 49 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[oljemark]

Hi, @perrotta . I submitted the fourth PR with DQM plot fixes here: PR #41922

[mandrenguyen]

+reconstruction

[rappoccio]

This PR will need a "backport" to https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/tree/CMSSW_13_0_7_TOTEM_X before we create the release.

[smuzaffar]

@tvami , there are few changes already merged for 13_0_X on top of 13_0_7 (CMSSW_13_0_7...CMSSW_13_0_X ). Looks like TOTEM release will not include those changes so better to test it for 13_0_7

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-54d15c/33100/summary.html
COMMIT: ae1d0c8
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_0_7/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/41916/33100/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially removed 11 lines from the logs
• ROOTFileChecks: Some differences in event products or their sizes found
• Reco comparison results: 10 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 49
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3315916
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 9
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3315885
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 48 files compared)
• Checked 213 log files, 164 edm output root files, 49 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[mandrenguyen]

+1
resign

[emanueleusai]

+1

[tvami]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_13_0_7_TOTEM_X 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)

[rappoccio]

+1

[syuvivida]

@oljemark
could you check if the output of the playback test is ok? Thanks!! We used run 367104 for the test.
The output root file is here: /eos/cms/store/group/comm_dqm/temp_DQMGUI_data_repository/totem/

[mmusich]

@syuvivida I might have missed where the playback request was done. Please remember to keep ORM in the loop when discussing the preparations for the totem run.

[oljemark]

Hi @syuvivida . The recent replay test on the 13_0_7_TOTEM release used run 368805, where TOTEM T2 & TrackingStrips were connected. Also, was this test done with the PPS DQM client in normal mode? The TrackingStrips & TotemT2 are only run in the calibration mode, set here https://github.com/CTPPS/cmssw/blob/0a38b0798473b67bf0e3e09296a128103c9ba8c7/DQM/Integration/python/clients/ctpps_dqm_sourceclient-live_cfg.py#L94

[vavati]

@oljemark could you check if the output of the playback test is ok? Thanks!! We used run 367104 for the test. The output root file is here: /eos/cms/store/group/comm_dqm/temp_DQMGUI_data_repository/totem/

@syuvivida : we cannot judge the output in view of the Totem run as the run you have selected does not have T2 data neither strips data. So i suggest you use the same used for the T0 reply otherwise the test is not conclusive

[syuvivida]

@oljemark @vavati indeed this test was done with the normal mode. We will switch to the calibration mode. We will request the streamers of 368805. But I also noticed in run registry that PPS was excluded in DAQ in this run 368805. Is this ok for the test?

[mmusich]

@syuvivida

let me repeat myself, this sort of things need to coordinated at the joint ops level...

[syuvivida]

@mmusich sorry I forgot to reply to you earlier. We are discussing about the playback runs in the online DQM machines. In the past, this piece of information was usually passed from the other DQM convener @emanueleusai to the DQM core team (after either reading the code or communication with the authors).

[mmusich]

We are discussing about the playback runs in the online DQM machines. In the past, this piece of information was usually passed from the other DQM convener

@syuvivida I let you (as DQM expert) to clear up the internal details of the online DQM. What I mean is that for information such as which run to test, which Global Tags to use, etc., the ORM chat is the best place to ask, to avoid picking up configurations at random.

[syuvivida]

@oljemark @vavati we just received streamers of 368805 at our playback machines this morning. The calibration sequence was turned on in this playback run.
Please take a look of the output root file here and let us know if the plots look ok. Thanks!!
/eos/cms/store/group/comm_dqm/temp_DQMGUI_data_repository/totem/DQM_V0001_CTPPS_R000528350.root

[vavati]

@oljemark @vavati we just received streamers of 368805 at our playback machines this morning. The calibration sequence was turned on in this playback run. Please take a look of the output root file here and let us know if the plots look ok. Thanks!! /eos/cms/store/group/comm_dqm/temp_DQMGUI_data_repository/totem/DQM_V0001_CTPPS_R000528350.root

@syuvivida Thanks. I checked and the plots looks ok (at least they are not empty!) If you didn't get any issue during the playback I would say that these are validated. Next step will be another global run in a couple of days when T2 will be installed.