Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Various optimization in tracking #18457

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
May 5, 2017
Merged

Conversation

VinInn
Copy link
Contributor

@VinInn VinInn commented Apr 25, 2017

Optimization in various areas, not affecting algorithm behavior.
initialStepPreSplitting made faster w/o affecting physics.
Expect negligible regressions due to numerics...
MTV:
ttbar 0PU with latest IB:
http://innocent.home.cern.ch/innocent/RelVal/pu0_TkSpeed91X/plots_ootb/effandfake1.pdf
ttbar PU50 with pre2
http://innocent.home.cern.ch/innocent/RelVal/pu50_fastTk91_2/plots_ootb/effandfake1.pdf

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 25, 2017

A new Pull Request was created by @VinInn (Vincenzo Innocente) for master.

It involves the following packages:

DataFormats/SiPixelCluster
Geometry/CommonTopologies
RecoLocalTracker/SiPixelRecHits
RecoTracker/FinalTrackSelectors
RecoTracker/IterativeTracking
TrackPropagation/RungeKutta

@perrotta, @civanch, @Dr15Jones, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @mschrode, @dkotlins, @gpetruc, @ebrondol, @threus, @dgulhan this is something you requested to watch as well.
@Muzaffar, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented Apr 25, 2017

@cmsbuild, please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 25, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/19368/console Started: 2017/04/25 13:22

inline float charge() const {
float qm = 0.0;
inline int charge() const {
int qm = 0;
int isize = thePixelADC.size();
for (int i=0; i<isize; ++i)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@VinInn - it can be simplified:

for( auto i :  thePixelADC )
 qm += i;

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

or
return std::accumulate(thePixelADC.begin(),thePixelADC.end(),int(0));

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

even better

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #18457 was updated. @perrotta, @civanch, @Dr15Jones, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Apr 29, 2017 via email

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented May 2, 2017

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 2, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/19514/console Started: 2017/05/02 15:00

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 2, 2017

-1

Tested at: 974524a

You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-18457/19514/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: UnitTests

  • Unit Tests:

I found errors in the following unit tests:

---> test testAlignmentOfflineValidation had ERRORS

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 2, 2017

Comparison job queued.

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented May 2, 2017

An exception of category 'Configuration' occurred while
   [0] Constructing the EventProcessor
   [1] Constructing module: class=PrimaryVertexValidation label='PVValidation'
Exception Message:
MissingParameter: Parameter 'Tpurge' not found.
----- End Fatal Exception -------------------------------------------------
Failure running test_OfflineValidaiton_cfg.py: status 73
status = 18688

---> test testAlignmentOfflineValidation had ERRORS

not from this PR

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 2, 2017

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-18457/19514/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • You potentially added 1979969 lines to the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 5567 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 24
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 1831629
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 76180
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 1755268
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 180
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • Checked 98 log files, 14 edm output root files, 24 DQM output files

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor

makortel commented May 3, 2017

The unit test failure is likely caused by #18330. It added that parameter, and I see the unit test first failing in CMSSW_9_1_X_2017-04-28-1100 where the PR was merged.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented May 3, 2017

+1

for #18457 974524a

  • changes look OK, primarily technical/numerical speedups
  • jenkins tests pass and comparisons with baseline show numerous small changes starting from tracks and propagating to downstream objects, nothing is significant to mention (expected)
  • local tests with larger samples confirm the expected behavior. The reduction in CPU time in ttbar PU35 (wf 10224) is about 3% total of the reco time with the tracking modules speedup by about 5% (*Step* modules ). Tested in CMSSW_9_1_X_2017-04-28-1100.

This PR looks safe for 91X which is essentially closed.
It more naturally falls in the scope of 92X.

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented May 4, 2017

I am only afraid the it may clash with changes in pixel geometry and localreco

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented May 4, 2017 via email

@smuzaffar smuzaffar modified the milestones: CMSSW_9_2_X, CMSSW_9_1_X May 4, 2017
@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented May 4, 2017

ok, let's merge as soon as the first 9_2_X IB appears...

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented May 5, 2017

now that 9_2_X IB is out is this PR candidate for merging or the whole test & validation procedure should start from scratch?

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

davidlange6 commented May 5, 2017 via email

@VinInn
Copy link
Contributor Author

VinInn commented May 5, 2017

Not to my knowledge...

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

davidlange6 commented May 5, 2017 via email

@davidlange6 davidlange6 merged commit f9e782e into cms-sw:master May 5, 2017
@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented May 8, 2017

here, jenkins said You potentially added 1979969 lines to the logs
... maybe we should put some color coding?

(the fix is in #18617 )

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants