change input siPixelClusters collection for 1040.0 wf step2

[mmusich]

PR description:

Further follow-up to #44925, which was already following up to #44914, in order to fix the issue reported at #44925 (comment).
This is necessary because in order to modify the instance of SiPixelStatusProducer in TIER0RAWSIPIXELCAL, configured as

cmssw/CalibTracker/SiPixelQuality/python/SiPixelStatusProducer_cfi.py

Lines 3 to 8 in 2169b56

	siPixelStatusProducer = cms.EDProducer("SiPixelStatusProducer",
	SiPixelStatusProducerParameters = cms.PSet(
	badPixelFEDChannelCollections = cms.VInputTag(cms.InputTag('siPixelDigis')),
	pixelClusterLabel = cms.untracked.InputTag("siPixelClusters::RECO"),
	)
	)

to fetch the right input collection siPixelClusters::ALCARECO (as ALCARECO is the process name now, to match the one use by the subsequent step ALCASPLITSIPIXELCAL)

PR validation:

runTheMatrix.py -l 1040,1040.1 -t 4 -j 8 --ibeos runs fine. Also the are no more warnings.

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:

Not a backport, will be backported at #44918

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[mmusich]

test parameters:

• enable_tests = threading
• workflows_threading = 1040, 1040.1

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-44932/40207

• This PR adds an extra 56KB to repository

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

  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_steps.py modified in PR(s): Fix relval embedding workflows #44928

[cmsbuild]

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

It involves the following packages:

• Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (upgrade, pdmv)

@subirsarkar, @cmsbuild, @miquork, @sunilUIET, @srimanob, @AdrianoDee can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@missirol, @makortel, @slomeo, @fabiocos, @Martin-Grunewald this is something you requested to watch as well.
@sextonkennedy, @rappoccio, @antoniovilela you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mmusich]

@cmsbuild, please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6e20a1/39308/summary.html
COMMIT: 473b96d
CMSSW: CMSSW_14_1_X_2024-05-08-1100/el8_amd64_gcc12
Additional Tests: THREADING
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/44932/39308/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:

• @mmusich BTV HLT monitoring: exclude paths requiring pfMassDecorrelatedParticleNetDiscriminatorsJetTags when pp_on_PbPb_run3 is active #44926
• @mmusich fix process name for TIER0RAWSIPIXELCAL step #44925

You can see more details here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6e20a1/39308/git-recent-commits.json
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-6e20a1/39308/git-merge-result

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially added 1 lines to the logs
• Reco comparison results: 14 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3332476
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 9
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3332447
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 47 files compared)
• Checked 202 log files, 165 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[mmusich]

now 1040.0, step2 logs are clean

[mmusich]

@cms-sw/pdmv-l2 @cms-sw/upgrade-l2 kind ping

[srimanob]

+Upgrade

[AdrianoDee]

+pdmv
(thanks for the follow-up)

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

[antoniovilela]

+pdmv (thanks for the follow-up)

Thanks @mmusich.

[antoniovilela]

+1