[NGT] Add local and remote HLT config files to EvFDaqDirector copy

[mzarucki]

PR description:

Adds split local and remote HLT configuration files (HltConfig_local.py, HltConfig_remote.py) used for MPI offloading to EvFDaqDirector as optional files for copy. Needed so that it can automatically be picked up by HLTD on the FUs from the BU (see HLTD Issue #4).

N.B. There is no urgency, however, it is a nice-to-have.

CC: @smorovic @fwyzard @Annnnya @ghyls

PR validation:

The change is trivial and has been successfully compiled and tested with the basic battery of runTheMatrix and scram tests.

Pass   99s ... EventFilter/Utilities/BUFU_TEST
Pass   71s ... EventFilter/Utilities/EventFilterUtilitiesReadStreamerFile

If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:

Plan to backport to CMSSW_16_0_X and CMSSW_16_1_X, so that it can be used by the HLT Test Stand (which follows the HLT/DAQ/Hilton releases).

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-50947/49355

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mzarucki for master.

It involves the following packages:

• EventFilter/Utilities (daq)

@cmsbuild, @emeschi, @smorovic can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald, @fwyzard, @missirol this is something you requested to watch as well.
@ftenchini, @mandrenguyen, @sextonkennedy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mmusich]

type ngt

[mmusich]

please test

[mzarucki]

Backports: #50948 (CMSSW_16_0_X) and #50949 (CMSSW_16_1_X)

[fwyzard]

hold

It's not at all clear to me that we should do this:

• HltConfig_local.py could just replace the regular HltConfig.py, instead of being copied in addition;
• HltConfig_remote.py is not needed by the FUs, and could be copied directly to the remote server.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request has been put on hold by @fwyzard
They need to issue an unhold command to remove the hold state or L1 can unhold it for all

[cmsbuild]

+1

Size: This PR adds an extra 40KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-46d331/53271/summary.html
COMMIT: 3eef6bd
CMSSW: CMSSW_17_0_X_2026-05-15-1100/el8_amd64_gcc13
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/50947/53271/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially added 5 lines to the logs
• ROOTFileChecks: Some differences in event products or their sizes found
• Reco comparison results: 5 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 53
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 4187168
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 4187145
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 52 files compared)
• Checked 227 log files, 197 edm output root files, 53 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[fwyzard]

unhold

OK, @mzarucki explained the rationale behind this approach.

I don't know if it makes sense to include this in a release (it's late for 16.0.x anyway, and 17.0.x won't be used for data taking), but if it's OK for @cms-sw/daq-l2 I don't have objections.

[smorovic]

unhold

OK, @mzarucki explained the rationale behind this approach.

I don't know if it makes sense to include this in a release (it's late for 16.0.x anyway, and 17.0.x won't be used for data taking), but if it's OK for @cms-sw/daq-l2 I don't have objections.

No objection to merging it into the codebase but it will obviously not be in a new release for pp (maybe it comes "for free" for HI data taking if/when new version is tagged).

[smorovic]

+daq

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @sextonkennedy, @mandrenguyen, @ftenchini (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[mandrenguyen]

+1