EMCAL: only request FV0/FT0 trigger inputs in digitizer if detectors are present - #15719
EMCAL: only request FV0/FT0 trigger inputs in digitizer if detectors are present#15719ehellbar wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
|
This fixes one of the issues in https://its.cern.ch/jira/browse/O2-7142. Here I assume that only running detectors are also present in the |
| /// \brief Create new digitizer spec | ||
| /// \return Digitizer spec | ||
| o2::framework::DataProcessorSpec getEMCALDigitizerSpec(int channel, bool requireCTPInput, bool mctruth = true, bool useccdb = true); | ||
| o2::framework::DataProcessorSpec getEMCALDigitizerSpec(int channel, bool requireCTPInput, std::vector<o2::detectors::DetID>& detList, bool mctruth = true, bool useccdb = true); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could be const std::vector<o2::detectors::DetID>& detList, otherwise fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, thanks, and done
| for (const auto& trg : ctx.inputs().get<gsl::span<o2::ft0::DetTrigInput>>("ft0inputs")) { | ||
| if (trg.mInputs.to_ulong() & ft0mask) { | ||
| mbtriggers.emplace_back(trg.mIntRecord); | ||
| if (ft0mask > 0) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
actually, relying on the ft0mask / fv0mask value might not be a good idea since dummy / default CTPCONFIG objects for unanchored MC could still contain both triggers. I will propagate the detList also to the class instance.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
done. I replaced the ft0mask/fv0mask conditions with a check on the actual list of input detectors.
shahor02
left a comment
shahor02
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be easier to use DetID::mask_t instead of the vector, but for a few isolated calls it does not matter.
|
cool stuff. I used the detector mask for the EMCAL digitizer, will check if it makes sense to replace the vector also in general in Steer/DigitizerWorkflow/src/SimpleDigitizerWorkflow.cxx |
2 participants
No description provided.