Closed lpetre-ulb closed 4 years ago
Does #263 also try to solve the same problem in a different way? Or is the problem #263 solves independent from the problem(s) addressed by this?
This PR is not related to #263, but is a dependency of https://github.com/cms-gem-daq-project/vfatqc-python-scripts/pull/288. The vref_adc
column was previously filtered out in getVFAT3CalInfo
while its values are very important (as the past few days have shown ;)
The misleading warning message was also seen during debugging at P5, but is not the same as the one #263 is trying to fix.
Description
[See cms-gem-daq-project/vfatqc-python-scripts#288 for more details.]
This PR makes the following two changes:
vref_adc
column from the database ingetVFAT3CalInfo
.Types of changes
Motivation and Context
DAC scan failures encountered during commissioning at P5.
How Has This Been Tested?
VREF_ADC
values are correctly written to files in the$GEM_PATH
and on the CTP7 withgetCalInfoFromDB.py
.Checklist: