Workflow to test the new @hltScouting DQM sequence in ScoutingPFMonitor dataset

[silviodonato]

Dear @cms-sw/pdmv-l2 and @cms-sw/dqm-l2 ,

the scouting group has recently integrated #47235 and #47212 which added a new DQM sequence @hltScouting.
This sequence is supposed to run only during the RECO of the ScoutingPFMonitor dataset.
This will work only with 2025 data (*) but it can be tested with this file [1].
What do you think it is the best way to implement this?

Shall we add a

steps["RECO2024_HLTScouting"] = {
    '-s': 'RAW2DIGI,L1Reco,RECO,EI,PAT,DQM:@hltScouting',
    '--conditions': 'auto:run3_data',     # or whichever is appropriate
    '--scenario': 'pp', 
    '--data': '',                        # indicates real data (not MC)
    '--era': 'Run3_2024',                # if your release supports Run3_2024
    '--eventcontent': 'FEVTDEBUGHLT,DQM',
    '--datatier': 'FEED,DQMIO',
    '-n': 100,                            # adjust event count as desired
    '--no_exec': '',
    '--python_filename': 'step_RECO2024_HLTScouting.py'
}

in relval_steps.py

and then add a new workflow in relval_standard.py. Shall we also add it in relval_production.py ?
Where should we store the file used in the test?

Thanks,
Silvio for Scouting/TSG.

cc: @elfontan @patinkaew @etzovara @CeliaFernandez @cms-sw/hlt-l2

(*) The reason is that in 2024 ScoutingPFMonitor dataset there are some events which do not contain the scouting objects.
This is has been solved for 2025 (see CMSHLT-3331 ). The file [1] is a copy of file from 2024 ScoutingPFMonitor after having removed the offending events.

[1] /eos/cms/store/group/dpg_trigger/comm_trigger/TriggerStudiesGroup/Scouting/Run3/ScoutingPFMonitor/300684ed-1a51-474f-8c4f-b3bf1e1f5044_skimmed.root

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[cmsbuild]

A new Issue was created by @silviodonato.

@Dr15Jones, @antoniovilela, @makortel, @mandrenguyen, @rappoccio, @sextonkennedy, @smuzaffar can you please review it and eventually sign/assign? Thanks.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[makortel]

assign pdmv, dqm, hlt

[cmsbuild]

New categories assigned: pdmv,dqm,hlt

@AdrianoDee,@antoniovagnerini,@DickyChant,@Martin-Grunewald,@miquork,@mmusich,@rseidita you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks

[silviodonato]

A workflow was ran manually by Elisa to test #47235 (see PR description)

[silviodonato]

@JavierGarciadeCastro

[mmusich]

assign pdmv, dqm, hlt

I am not exactly sure what's the hlt deliverable here. Can't you make a PR with the proposed workflow and have pdmv review it as we do for all such cases?

[mmusich]

Can't you make a PR with the proposed workflow and have pdmv review it as we do for all such cases?

#47327 contains a proposal

[silviodonato]

Thank you Marco! I'm closing this issue, I let @cms-sw/dqm-l2 and @cms-sw/pdmv-l2 to comment directly in #47327

[mmusich]

@silviodonato can you re-open the issue?
I would leave it open, until we have 2025 data that we can use to replace the hardcoded input file (skimmed for events without scouting collections). At that point I can take care of updating the tests (suggestion form @mtosi )