fix ES unpacker when the 2nd OptoRX is diabled, but the 1t and 3rd Op…

[cmkuo]

This is to fix the problem when the second ES OptoRX is disabled, but the first and third OptoRX are enabled in the ES unpacker. The problem would cause the data in third OptoRX are not unpacked.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @cmkuo for CMSSW_7_6_X.

fix ES unpacker when the 2nd OptoRX is diabled, but the 1t and 3rd Op

It involves the following packages:

EventFilter/ESRawToDigi

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: e92ac79
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11614/8586/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11614/8586/summary.html

[cvuosalo]

+1

For #11614 e92ac79

Fixing an ES unpacker bug where the third OptoRX is missed in certain cases. #11613 is the 74X version of this PR, and it has already been approved by Reco.

The code changes are satisfactory, and Jenkins tests against baseline CMSSW_7_6_X_2015-10-01-2300 show no significant differences. Test results in #11613 show the expected changes from this fix. There are still some minor code issues raised in #11613 that should be addressed in a new PR for 76X (or 77X).

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_6_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1