Remove PixelTripletLowPtGenerator as obsolete

[makortel]

While migrating PixelTrackProducer to the new seeding framework (from #16635), I encountered AllPixelTracks_cfi configuration using PixelTripletLowPtGenerator. Neither of them is currently used by anything else, so this PR proposes to remove them as obsolete.

The removal of RecoPixelVertexing/PixelTrackFitting/test/test_cfg.py is not related to PixelTripletLowPtGenerator, but something additional I encountered that looked obsolete (and hence maybe not worth to be migrated). I included it here since it was also under RecoPixelVertexing.

Tested in CMSSW_9_0_X_2016-12-02-1100, no changes expected.

@rovere @VinInn

[makortel]

@cmsbuild, please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/16811/console Started: 2016/12/06 16:48

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @makortel (Matti Kortelainen) for CMSSW_9_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

RecoPixelVertexing/PixelLowPtUtilities
RecoPixelVertexing/PixelTrackFitting

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @dgulhan, @rovere, @VinInn this is something you requested to watch as well.
@slava77, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

[Martin-Grunewald]

RecoPixelVertexing/PixelLowPtUtilities/python/AllPixelTracks_cfi.py
is used by ConfDB parsing.

[makortel]

@Martin-Grunewald Ok. Can you easily tell what information ConfDB parsing picks from the file that is not already elsewhere?

[Martin-Grunewald]

ConfDB parsing is used to discover the parameters at top-level of the module class.
It is based on this cfi file for the PixelTrackProducer. The parameters within the
PSet parameters can be changed/added/subtracted, but the top-level parameters are fixed.

This results in:

process.hltPixelTracks = cms.EDProducer( "PixelTrackProducer",
    useFilterWithES = cms.bool( False ),
    FilterPSet = cms.PSet( 
      chi2 = cms.double( 1000.0 ),
      nSigmaTipMaxTolerance = cms.double( 0.0 ),
      ComponentName = cms.string( "PixelTrackFilterByKinematics" ),
      nSigmaInvPtTolerance = cms.double( 0.0 ),
      ptMin = cms.double( 0.1 ),
      tipMax = cms.double( 1.0 )
    ),
    passLabel = cms.string( "" ),
    FitterPSet = cms.PSet( 
      ComponentName = cms.string( "PixelFitterByHelixProjections" ),
      TTRHBuilder = cms.string( "hltESPTTRHBuilderPixelOnly" ),
      fixImpactParameter = cms.double( 0.0 )
    ),
    RegionFactoryPSet = cms.PSet( 
      ComponentName = cms.string( "GlobalRegionProducerFromBeamSpot" ),
      RegionPSet = cms.PSet( 
        precise = cms.bool( True ),
        originRadius = cms.double( 0.2 ),
        ptMin = cms.double( 0.9 ),
        originHalfLength = cms.double( 24.0 ),
        beamSpot = cms.InputTag( "hltOnlineBeamSpot" ),
        useMultipleScattering = cms.bool( False ),
        useFakeVertices = cms.bool( False )
      )
    ),
    CleanerPSet = cms.PSet(  ComponentName = cms.string( "PixelTrackCleanerBySharedHits" ) ),
    OrderedHitsFactoryPSet = cms.PSet( 
      ComponentName = cms.string( "StandardHitTripletGenerator" ),
      GeneratorPSet = cms.PSet( 
        useBending = cms.bool( True ),
        useFixedPreFiltering = cms.bool( False ),
        maxElement = cms.uint32( 100000 ),
        phiPreFiltering = cms.double( 0.3 ),
        extraHitRPhitolerance = cms.double( 0.06 ),
        useMultScattering = cms.bool( True ),
        SeedComparitorPSet = cms.PSet( 
          ComponentName = cms.string( "LowPtClusterShapeSeedComparitor" ),
          clusterShapeCacheSrc = cms.InputTag( "hltSiPixelClustersCache" )
        ),
        extraHitRZtolerance = cms.double( 0.06 ),
        ComponentName = cms.string( "PixelTripletHLTGenerator" )
      ),
      SeedingLayers = cms.InputTag( "hltPixelLayerTriplets" )
    )
)

If there is another cfi file with all top-level parameters as above, we could use that!

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 164031c
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-16886/16811/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-16886/16811/summary.html

The workflows 1003.0, 1001.0, 1000.0, 140.53, 136.731, 4.22 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons

[makortel]

More "proper" cfi for PixelTrackProducer would be https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/CMSSW_9_0_X/RecoPixelVertexing/PixelTrackFitting/python/PixelTracks_cfi.py (it is used in workflows running pixel tracking offline). On the other hand, my #16792 and next-to-#16792 PRs will make PixelTrackProducer configuration look completely different (ok, #16792 actually migrates this file, but for its followup I decided to give up if possible), but you'll get cfi's for everything via fillDescriptions() (and complete "migration" in customizeHLTforCMSSW).

To be practical, since this PR is not urgently needed (it's mainly to answer beforehand possible questions on next-to-#16792 why I'm not migrating these pieces), it's probably easiest to wait until next-to-#16792 gets merged so that there'll be a fully consistent setup for the "new way" to be eventually parsed to ConfDB.

Could somebody "hold" this PR? (or is closing preferred?)

[cvuosalo]

hold

[cmsbuild]

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

[slava77]

@makortel #16792 is merged already.
Do we have a number for the post-#16792 PR mentioned in #16886 (comment) ?

[slava77]

a bunch of merge conflicts has accumulated here already
Maybe it's time to close or at least rebase.

[makortel]

@slava77

Do we have a number for the post-#16792 PR mentioned in #16886 (comment) ?

Not yet, because I'd prefer either #17041 or #17042 (HLT era support) to be merged first, because those would allow me easily to test the HLT-customize to avoid breaking it, and any development in the customize file (HLTrigger/Configuration/python/customizeHLTTrackingForPhaseI2017.py) would conflict with #17041/#17042.

a bunch of merge conflicts has accumulated here already
Maybe it's time to close or at least rebase.

I'll rebase and also "descope" (from deletion of PixelTripletLowPtGenerator to adding large "FIXME" comments on top of the files, because low-pT analyses may need it in the future, as I mentioned in the last reco meeting), probably tomorrow.

[slava77]

@makortel
#17042 was merged two weeks ago (a couple of working days ago).
it may be time to update this to the desired (descoped) implementation.

[makortel]

@slava77 I know, unfortunately this one has fallen a bit below of other (more useful) stuff and holidays. I'll try to update by the end of the week.

[davidlange6]

hi @makortel - should we close this?

[makortel]

Maybe indeed better close for now, as it continues to stay below other stuff (sorry for that). I'll make a new PR with updated content when I find a good time to do it.