add a TransientTrackingRechitBuilder for CPEFast

[mmusich]

PR description:

As per request of the Tracker Alignment group, I provide a TransientTrackingRechitBuilder flavour for PixelCPEFast, as it might be useful for checking the calibration performance at the HLT pixel tracking step.
In order to avoid a run-time assertion, a line has been removed in RecoLocalTracker/SiPixelRecHits/src/PixelCPEFast.cc, while a new warning is emitted from RecoTracker/TransientTrackingRecHit/plugins/TkTransientTrackingRecHitBuilderESProducer.cc in order to warn the user that track angles will not be used.

PR validation:

Run the configuration files at this gist.
Also, results using this configuration will be shown at the upcoming TK DPG meeting

If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:

N/A

cc:
@consuegs @antoniovagnerini

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-40003/32938

• This PR adds an extra 20KB to repository

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

  • File RecoLocalTracker/SiPixelRecHits/src/PixelCPEFast.cc modified in PR(s): Tracker Traits and Enabling Phase2 for Inner Tracker Reconstruction on GPU #38761

[cmsbuild]

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

It involves the following packages:

• RecoLocalTracker/SiPixelRecHits (reconstruction)
• RecoTracker/TransientTrackingRecHit (reconstruction)

@cmsbuild, @mandrenguyen, @clacaputo can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@mtosi, @VourMa, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @rovere, @VinInn, @mroguljic, @missirol, @dkotlins, @ferencek, @gpetruc, @mmusich, @threus, @dgulhan, @tvami this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mmusich]

@cmsbuild, please test

[slava77]

type tracking

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-44fdbd/28821/summary.html
COMMIT: fd4f0a4
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_6_X_2022-11-06-2300/el8_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/40003/28821/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 9421 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3416402
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 23042
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3393338
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.415 KiB( 47 files compared)
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 11834.0 ): 0.415 KiB SiStrip/MechanicalView
• Checked 206 log files, 48 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: found differences in 3 / 46 workflows

[mmusich]

Reco comparison results: 9421 differences found in the comparisons

I am really not sure how this PR can cause this, it should be in principle a no-regressions PR.

[slava77]

Reco comparison results: 9421 differences found in the comparisons

I am really not sure how this PR can cause this, it should be in principle a no-regressions PR.

I see changes in unrelated detectors, e.g. CSC.
Is the updated CPE code a part of the DIGI step? Is that part in a random sequence that's non-specific to pixel and also handles randoms for other subdetectors/digitizers?

[mmusich]

Is the updated CPE code a part of the DIGI step? Is that part in a random sequence that's non-specific to pixel and also handles randoms for other subdetectors/digitizers?

certainly not.

[mmusich]

@cmsbuild, please test

• to check the tests above

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-44fdbd/28885/summary.html
COMMIT: fd4f0a4
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_6_X_2022-11-08-1100/el8_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/40003/28885/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 6 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3416402
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 7
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3416373
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 47 files compared)
• Checked 206 log files, 48 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[mmusich]

DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 7

Now this is more understandable, all changes are still unrelated.

[clacaputo]

+reconstruction

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

[perrotta]

+1