[Halld-offline] New fADC250 data format + sim-recon

[David Lawrence]

Hi Paul,

  Not sure I follow. We will have to have merged this into master by the time the run starts since the
new data will be coming in this format. 

-Dave


> On Sep 15, 2016, at 2:08 PM, Paul Mattione <pmatt at jlab.org> wrote:
> 
> I vote against debugging on the master.  In addition to the typical complaints of potentially breaking code if people implement something that doesn’t work, this may cause crashes in counting house monitoring (The L1 hists I added need them). 
> 
> - Paul
> 
> On Sep 15, 2016, at 2:04 PM, David Lawrence <davidl at jlab.org> wrote:
> 
>> Dear fADC250 fans,
>> 
>> I have just pushed some changes to a branch (davidl_Df250PulseData) to support
>> the new f250 firmware at the digihit level for all detectors. As you may know, the new
>> firmware includes a new data type that combines information previously spread over
>> the following classes:
>> 
>> Df250PulseIntegral
>> Df250PulseTime
>> Df250PulsePedestal
>> 
>> The new class that reflects this new data type is:
>> 
>> Df250PulseData
>> 
>> 
>> The digihits actually did not require much change since they already contained
>> members to hold values from the 3 older classes. The changes are:
>> 
>> 1. The “pulse_peak" value is now a member of all digihit classes derived from fADC250 data
>> (BCAL already contained this, but now all others do as well)
>> 
>> 2. A new member “datasource” has been added that will be set to “1” for the old firmware
>> and “2” for the new firmware. This may also be set to “0” if the emulate flag is set
>> indicating that the values were derived from Window Raw Data
>> 
>> 3. The QF value is now a combination of 7 quality factor bits when the data comes
>> from the new firmware. i.e. Interpretation of the QF value should depend on the value
>> of “datasource”.
>> 
>> 
>> Finally, one additional piece of information available in the new firmware is the 
>> "nsamples_over_threshold”. Currently, this is available in the Df250PulseData
>> which may be obtained from the digihit via the Associated Objects mechanism.
>> I did not add an additional member to all digihits to hold another copy of this
>> value. If there is strong desire to make an additional copy of this value at the digihits
>> level then we can do that. We could also consider adding it as some higher bits
>> to the QF value.
>> 
>> I will likely put a pull request in for this soon. If I get a file with the new format soon
>> I will test it on that first. Otherwise, I’ll just put in the pull request and we can debug 
>> it on the master.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> -David
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Halld-offline mailing list
>> Halld-offline at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-offline
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Halld-offline mailing list
> Halld-offline at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-offline