Support for Phase-2 mkFit initialStep track building

[mmasciov]

PR description:

This PR adds the ability to run mkFit on Phase-2 data / geometry. Only initialStep iteration is supported so far, with a dedicated workflow (24834.702).

• Add CMSSW Phase-2 hit and seed converters.

• Properly support binary readout for Phase-2 strips where cluster-charge cut can
  not be applied.

• Improve standalone performance monitoring & debugging tools.

It requires also a new JSON file in cmssw/data repository:
cms-data/RecoTracker-MkFit#14

PR validation:

In TTbar events, with PU:

• Phase-2 (PU200, where mkFit is only used for initialStep track building): http://uaf-10.t2.ucsd.edu/~mmasciov/MIC/Phase2/MTV_TTbar_PU200_Run4_mkFitInitialStep_April16/
• Phase-1 (2024; no change, as expected): http://uaf-10.t2.ucsd.edu/~mmasciov/MIC/Phase2/MTV_TTbar_PU_Run3_April16/

FYI: @osschar, @slava77, @kskovpen

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-44708/39914

• This PR adds an extra 120KB to repository

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_2026.py modified in PR(s): introducing BigPixel for phase-2 InnerTracker in T39 geometry #44576
  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/upgradeWorkflowComponents.py modified in PR(s): Add run3 tracking low pu era #33532, add Era_Run3_2024, Era_Run3_2025, Tier0 reco scenario for 2024, and change default era in PyReleaseValidation #43761, Alpaka vs CUDA DQM compare modules for pixel tracks objects #43964, introducing BigPixel for phase-2 InnerTracker in T39 geometry #44576

[cmsbuild]

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

It involves the following packages:

• Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (upgrade, pdmv)
• RecoTracker/IterativeTracking (reconstruction)
• RecoTracker/MkFit (reconstruction)
• RecoTracker/MkFitCMS (reconstruction)
• RecoTracker/MkFitCore (reconstruction)

@srimanob, @miquork, @AdrianoDee, @subirsarkar, @cmsbuild, @sunilUIET, @jfernan2, @mandrenguyen can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@missirol, @VinInn, @JanFSchulte, @gpetruc, @VourMa, @dgulhan, @mmusich, @rovere, @makortel, @Martin-Grunewald, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @mtosi, @fabiocos, @felicepantaleo, @slomeo this is something you requested to watch as well.
@rappoccio, @sextonkennedy, @antoniovilela you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mandrenguyen]

test parameters:

• pull_request = First JSON configuration for phase-2 initialStep mkFit tracking iteration cms-data/RecoTracker-MkFit#14
• workflows = 24834.702

[mandrenguyen]

please test

[cmsbuild]

-1

Failed Tests: ClangBuild
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-fb6282/38802/summary.html
COMMIT: 8155977
CMSSW: CMSSW_14_1_X_2024-04-11-2300/el8_amd64_gcc12
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/44708/38802/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Clang Build

I found compilation warning while trying to compile with clang. Command used:

USER_CUDA_FLAGS='--expt-relaxed-constexpr' USER_CXXFLAGS='-Wno-register -fsyntax-only' scram build -k -j 32 COMPILER='llvm compile'

See details on the summary page.

[slava77]

I found compilation warning while trying to compile with clang. Command used:

RecoTracker/MkFitCore/interface/IdxChi2List.h:21:18: 
warning: definition of implicit copy constructor for 'IdxChi2List' is deprecated 
because it has a user-declared copy assignment operator [-Wdeprecated-copy]

@osschar this is probably for you

[slava77]

RecoTracker/MkFitCore/interface/IdxChi2List.h:21:18: 
warning: definition of implicit copy constructor for 'IdxChi2List' is deprecated 
because it has a user-declared copy assignment operator [-Wdeprecated-copy]

uhm, or does this message just mean we need also IdxChi2List(IdxChi2List const& ) = default;

if everything is default, is there even a point to list anything?

[makortel]

uhm, or does this message just mean we need also IdxChi2List(IdxChi2List const& ) = default;

Correct. Or remove the definition copy assignment operator.

if everything is default, is there even a point to list anything?

Generally speaking no, there is no point in default-defining member functions where it is clear the compiler generates the expected definitions implicitly (i.e. the "rule of 5" still holds). Elsewhere we have generally preferred to remove the default-defined copy constructor or assignment operator when only one of those was defined.

[slava77]

@cms-sw/pdmv-l2 @cms-sw/upgrade-l2 your signature is needed for this PR.
Please check.
It would be nice to get this to 14_1_0_pre3 (planned next week, if I understand correctly)

[AdrianoDee]

Why a different class (and then a different offset)? I don't see anything that could not have been done with UpgradeWorkflow_trackingMkFit as is using the same *.7 offset. Or am I missing something?

[AdrianoDee]

(Ok, not with the same suffix but within the same class yes)

[mmasciov]

Phase-2 would need a different process modifier, and should not modify step2 on the other hand.
That's why we went with a different class, because it was the simplest solution. We may review this (and remove the class) when we'l have more than one iteration working in phase-2, so that we can reduce otherwise-needed modifications to the mkFit procModifiers?

[AdrianoDee]

Yea, this was clear. And yes, most probably it's easier to have this rather than "disabling" the other iterations with something like ~phase2_tracker. Maybe I would have inverted the logic here (so a UpgradeWorkflow_trackingMkFitInitialStep) just to have it clear what's happening in the wf from the name. Anyway as you say, this will need to be reviewed anyway later.

[AdrianoDee]

+pdmv
(discussion in https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/44708/files#r1572627562 for a future setup)

[slava77]

@cms-sw/upgrade-l2 your signature is needed for this PR.
Please check.

I'm not sure @AdrianoDee still has the upgrade signature rights ;)

[slava77]

@cms-sw/upgrade-l2 your signature is needed for this PR. Please check.

@cms-sw/orp-l2 @rappoccio
please comment if this can make it to pre3.
Thank you.

[srimanob]

Hi @mmasciov @slava77 @mmusich
The readme should also be updated: https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/README.md
Please make the follow up PR.

[srimanob]

+Upgrade

This PR adds new Phase-2 mkfit workflow, and it will run in the long matrix (IB). The new workflow runs fine in the PR test.

[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. @rappoccio, @antoniovilela, @sextonkennedy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)
Notice This PR was tested with additional Pull Request(s), please also merge them if necessary: cms-data/RecoTracker-MkFit#14

[mmasciov]

Hi @mmasciov @slava77 @mmusich The readme should also be updated: https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/README.md Please make the follow up PR.

Thanks, @srimanob!
Done in #44839.

[slava77]

@cms-sw/orp-l2 @rappoccio
please comment if this can make it to pre3.

only your "ORP" signature is missing

[antoniovilela]

cms-data/RecoTracker-MkFit#14 (cms-sw/cmsdist#9159) merged.

[antoniovilela]

+1