Draft: UTDecoder ADC weighted algorithm

The RawBank now decoded and UTHit reconstructed as the ADC weighted value. The offset from the center of strip is also taken into account in UTHit x value estimation.

Run with Rec!3005 (closed), Moore!1647 (closed)

assigned to @mrudolph, @xuyuan, and @tskwarni

mentioned in merge request Rec!3005 (closed)

changed the description

added RTA label

mentioned in merge request Moore!1647 (closed)

changed the description

approved this merge request

I'll test right now but please fix the formatting

• [2022-07-06 17:56] Validation started with lhcb-master-mr#4961
• [2022-07-08 14:33] Validation started with lhcb-master-mr#4974
• [2022-07-12 17:05] Validation started with lhcb-master-mr#5008
• [2022-07-28 22:35] Validation started with lhcb-master-mr#5254
• [2022-09-23 11:08] Validation started with lhcb-master-mr#5733
• [2022-09-23 15:27] Validation started with lhcb-master-mr#5739

added 1 commit

• 7cf14418 - fixed

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 0ea92ed4 - Fixed formatting

Compare with previous version

resolved all threads

mentioned in issue Moore#456 (closed)

added 98 commits

• 0ea92ed4...e0bdaf66 - 94 commits from branch master
• edfc8342 - adcwgt
• 7d1efd5a - fixed
• f5e2c339 - Fixed formatting
• 5ea7182d - fixed

Compare with previous version

added 29 commits

• 5ea7182d...a20cc8b1 - 25 commits from branch master
• da1871c3 - adcwgt
• 9982a0bf - fixed
• 6193a260 - Fixed formatting
• 71d1452a - fixed

Compare with previous version

mentioned in issue Moore#465 (closed)

mentioned in issue Moore#467 (closed)

added UT label

added Decoding label

marked this merge request as draft

marked this merge request as ready

added 224 commits

• 71d1452a...e77c1fb7 - 220 commits from branch master
• 908c76b9 - adcwgt
• c341784c - fixed
• 1725d277 - Fixed formatting
• 0866b77a - fixed

Compare with previous version

Can this be tested?

Yes.

/ci-test Rec!3005 (closed) Moore!1647 (closed)

added ci-test-triggered label

added hlt1-throughput-increased label

assigned to @rmatev and unassigned @mrudolph, @xuyuan, and @tskwarni

marked this merge request as draft

marked this merge request as ready

@rmatev @sponce We reviewed this code and the status of the merge request with @tskwarni and in fact, this is ready for the merge. It is urgent for this merge request to happen asap, since we are implementing a newer version of this code that will be able to handle real TELL40 data, in which byte order is switched. Our new merge request will be submitted soon. It will be better for it to show up as an upgrade of this code. Therefore we removing draft.

resolved all threads

resolved all threads

mentioned in merge request !4132 (closed)

/ci-test Rec!3005 (closed) Moore!1647 (closed)

Started integration test build. Once done, check the results or the comparison to a reference build.

Throughput Test Moore_hlt2_fastest_reco: 0.0 Events/s -- change of -100.00% vs. reference

Throughput Test Moore_hlt2_pp_thor: 0.0 Events/s -- change of -100.00% vs. reference

Throughput Test Moore_spruce_all_lines: 88.9 Events/s -- change of 0.32% vs. reference . Total bandwidth 627.4 MB/s -- change of 0.38% vs. reference

Throughput Test Moore_hlt1_pp_default: 0.0 Events/s -- change of -100.00% vs. reference

Rerun the ci-test as previous results expired.

/ci-test Rec!3005 (closed) Moore!1647 (closed)

Action failed with

"lhcb/Rec!3005" cannot be merged

• [2023-06-14 00:35] Validation started with lhcb-master-mr#8232

added hlt2-throughput-decreased label

added hlt1-throughput-decreased label and removed hlt1-throughput-increased label

mentioned in issue Moore#598 (closed)

mentioned in issue Moore#599 (closed)

closed

We reviewed this MR again and decided that we won't proceed with it. The changes included in this MR are in !4168 (merged)

reopened

marked this merge request as draft

Dear reviewers. We are trying to sort out the situation with changes in Rec!3005 (closed), !3670 (closed) and Moore!1647 (closed). Since then, we moved this MR to draft.

Any news on that one ?

@sponce These changes were absorbed into later merge requests. I am closing this one to avoid confusion.

The present merge request dealing with the related code, which does need your attention is !4269 (merged)

Ok, noted. !4269 (merged) has a lot of unresolved discussions though. Is it ready for testing ? If yes, plese close the discussions

closed