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

Update of mkFit for 12_1_0_pre4 #35492

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 5, 2021
Merged

Conversation

mmasciov
Copy link
Contributor

@mmasciov mmasciov commented Sep 30, 2021

PR description:

This PR follows #35199 and updates mkFit in view of CMSSW_12_1_0_pre4.

In detail, this PR includes technical update of mkFit configurations.
Via cms-sw/cmsdist#7349 and cms-data/RecoTracker-MkFit#5 it includes updates to improve tracking performance, presented in detail at the Tracker DPG - Tracking POG general meeting.

It requires cms-sw/cmsdist#7349 and cms-data/RecoTracker-MkFit#5

PR validation:

Performance has been presented in detail at the Tracker DPG - Tracking POG general meeting

Full MTV results in TTbar events with PU (Run-3, 2021) are available:
http://uaf-10.t2.ucsd.edu/~mmasciov/MkFit_devs/TrackerDPGValidation/MTV_mkFit-7iter_pre4_plusCKF_Sep27/

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35492/25661

ERROR: Build errors found during clang-tidy run.

RecoTracker/MkFit/plugins/MkFitIterationConfigESProducer.cc:107:57: error: too few arguments to function call, expected at least 2, have 1 [clang-diagnostic-error]
  auto it_conf = mkfit::ConfigJson_Load_File(configFile_);
                                                        ^
/cvmfs/cms-ib.cern.ch/nweek-02700/slc7_amd64_gcc900/external/mkfit/3.2.0-182127d85853fa8c9c3dacd3aff7fb98/include/mkFit/IterationConfig.h:363:1: note: 'ConfigJson_Load_File' declared here
--
gmake: *** [config/SCRAM/GMake/Makefile.coderules:129: code-checks] Error 2
gmake: *** [There are compilation/build errors. Please see the detail log above.] Error 2

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor

code-checks with cms.week0.PR_bd16d39b/52.0-e05c6c4771494e730b9d4ac54b12b03d

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35492/25673

  • This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @mmasciov (Mario Masciovecchio) for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • RecoTracker/MkFit (reconstruction)

@jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @rovere, @VinInn, @ebrondol, @gpetruc, @mmusich, @mtosi, @dgulhan this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor

test parameters:

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild, please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 1, 2021

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3752eb/19304/summary.html
COMMIT: 349e25f
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_1_X_2021-09-30-1100/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/35492/19304/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic:

You can see more details here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3752eb/19304/git-recent-commits.json
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3752eb/19304/git-merge-result

Comparison Summary

The workflows 140.53 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

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 2034 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 40
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3211080
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3291
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 62
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3207705
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 65.355 KiB( 39 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): 63.680 KiB Hcal/DigiRunHarvesting
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): 1.676 KiB RPC/DCSInfo
  • Checked 169 log files, 37 edm output root files, 40 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

Copy link
Contributor

@jpata jpata left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are the differences in the mkFit / .7 workflows as expected?

const TrackVec &in_seeds,
const EventOfHits &eoh,
IterationSeedPartition &part) {
const int size = in_seeds.size();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
const int size = in_seeds.size();
const size_t size = in_seeds.size();

perhaps?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done, thanks.

IterationSeedPartition &part) {
const int size = in_seeds.size();

for (int i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
for (int i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
for (size_t i = 0; i < size; ++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.

Done, thanks.

const bool z_dir_pos = S.pz() > 0;

HitOnTrack hot = S.getLastHitOnTrack();
float eta = eoh[hot.layer].GetHit(hot.index).eta();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
float eta = eoh[hot.layer].GetHit(hot.index).eta();
const float eta = eoh[hot.layer].GetHit(hot.index).eta();

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done, thanks.


const LayerInfo &tec_first = z_dir_pos ? tecp1 : tecn1;

float maxR = S.maxReachRadius();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
float maxR = S.maxReachRadius();
const float maxR = S.maxReachRadius();

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done, thanks.

}

part.m_region[i] = reg;
part.m_sort_score[i] = 5.0f * (reg - 2) + eta;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

perhaps these magic numbers need to be put into a constexpr or clarified via a comment?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done: a constexpr is now used and a comment has been added to explain the point of this line. Thanks!

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 4, 2021

Pull request #35492 was updated. @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 4, 2021

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-35492/25740

  • This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 4, 2021

Pull request #35492 was updated. @jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Oct 4, 2021

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 4, 2021

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3752eb/19384/summary.html
COMMIT: 494a85d
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_1_X_2021-10-04-1300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/35492/19384/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic:

You can see more details here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3752eb/19384/git-recent-commits.json
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3752eb/19384/git-merge-result

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 1012 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 40
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3219394
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 269
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3219103
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 39 files compared)
  • Checked 169 log files, 37 edm output root files, 40 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Oct 5, 2021

Just to note, I'm ready to sign this PR, I'm waiting for cms-data/RecoTracker-MkFit#5 and cms-sw/cmsdist#7349 to be merged before leaving the reco sig.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Oct 5, 2021

Just to note, I'm ready to sign this PR, I'm waiting for cms-data/RecoTracker-MkFit#5 and cms-sw/cmsdist#7349 to be merged before leaving the reco sig.

in this case all 3 PRs have to be included at the same time. So, serializing the signature will not really work.

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Oct 5, 2021

+reconstruction

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Oct 5, 2021

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

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

perrotta commented Oct 5, 2021

+1

  • Merged for 12_1_0_pre4, as agreed right now at the ORP meeting

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.

6 participants