[Payload Inspector] Add more SiPixel inspection classes

[mmusich]

PR description:

This PR introduces several improvement of the SiPixel Payload Inspector suite:

• introduces inspection of the SiPixelTemplate Condition Format;
• introduces new plot format types, Phase1PixelMaps and PixelRegionContainers in order to display cleaner Pixel Tracker Maps and values / comparison plots split by Layer (Barrel) / Ring (Endcap);
• deploy the new plots for the SiStripLorentzAngle and SiPixelGainCalibrationOffline(ForHLT);
• migrate several classes to use the new template recommended after integration of Improvements for Payload inspector #29622;
• deploy new unit tests and test scripts;

PR validation:

Relies on the existing and newly introduced unit tests.
All the new plots have been tested also by hand; few examples are reproduced here:

• PixelRegionContainers comparing two SiPixelGainCalibrationOffline payloads from two different tags
  

• Phase1PixelMaps of the assume value of μH for one payload of SiPixelTemplate
  

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

This PR is not a backport and no backport is intended.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for master.

It involves the following packages:

CondCore/SiPixelPlugins

@ggovi, @cmsbuild can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@mmusich, @dkotlins, @VinInn this is something you requested to watch as well.
@silviodonato, @dpiparo you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mmusich]

@cmsbuild, please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-run-pr-tests/6394/console Started: 2020/05/18 17:51

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 21490dc
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-1270fb/6394/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_1_X_2020-05-18-1100
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-1270fb/6394/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 35
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2694466
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 48
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2694369
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 49
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 34 files compared)
• Checked 150 log files, 16 edm output root files, 35 DQM output files

[ggovi]

+1

[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. @silviodonato, @dpiparo (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[silviodonato]

+1
I will merge this in order to have it in CMSSW_11_1_0.
@mmusich, could you please make another PR to remove "magic numbers" (you can use constexpr), to remove the commented code, and to replace std::cout with edm::LogVerbatim or something like that?

[mmusich]

could you please make another PR to remove "magic numbers" (you can use constexpr), to remove the commented code, and to replace std::cout with edm::LogVerbatim or something like that?

@silviodonato sure, but please point to an example to either one of these.

To clarify a bit in advance:

• COUT is already protected from the a compilation flag here:
  

  cmssw/CondCore/SiPixelPlugins/interface/SiPixelPayloadInspectorHelper.h

  Lines 30 to 35 in 5aef21d

  	#ifdef MMDEBUG
  	#include <iostream>
  	#define COUT std::cout << "MM "
  	#else
  	#define COUT edm::LogVerbatim("")
  	#endif

• the "magic numbers" are mostly due to the geometry which is not accessible without the EventSetup (as in the Payload Inspector)

[silviodonato]

Here some examples. std::cout was in test, it is not problematic. About the constants, even if they are trivial, I think it is better to define a constexpr, especially if the same number is repeated in several points.

[silviodonato]

numbers