Clean up Phase-2 Geometry D86, D88, D91, D92, D93, D94, D97

[srimanob]

PR description:

This PR follows the issue #43251 to clean up all geometries with I14 and I15. With this PR, T24, T25, T30, I14, I15, O8 become unused geometries. They are in the list of obsolete subdetectors.

We will need a follow up PR, to introduce new geometry with HFNose to replace D94.

FYI @cms-sw/mtd-dpg-l2 @cms-sw/geometry-l2 @cms-sw/trk-dpg-l2 @emiglior @cms-sw/l1-l2

PR validation:

Try to dump D95, D110 config. runTheMatrix gives the proper config files.

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:

No need of backport.

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-45370/40803

• This PR adds an extra 64KB 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): CMSSW Integration of LST #45117
  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/upgradeWorkflowComponents.py modified in PR(s): Add run3 tracking low pu era #33532, CMSSW Integration of LST #45117, TICLv5 : Superclustering DNN #45333
  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/scripts/runTheMatrix.py modified in PR(s): Cleanup MINI/NANO modifiers #45240

[cmsbuild]

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

It involves the following packages:

• Configuration/Geometry (geometry, upgrade)
• Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (pdmv, upgrade)
• Configuration/StandardSequences (operations)
• Geometry/CMSCommonData (geometry, upgrade)

@AdrianoDee, @Dr15Jones, @antoniovilela, @bsunanda, @civanch, @cmsbuild, @davidlange6, @fabiocos, @kskovpen, @makortel, @mdhildreth, @miquork, @rappoccio, @srimanob, @subirsarkar, @sunilUIET can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @Martin-Grunewald, @VinInn, @VourMa, @bsunanda, @dgulhan, @fabiocos, @felicepantaleo, @makortel, @martinamalberti, @missirol, @mmusich, @mtosi, @rovere, @sameasy, @slomeo, @vargasa this is something you requested to watch as well.
@antoniovilela, @rappoccio, @sextonkennedy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[srimanob]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8685c7/40204/summary.html
COMMIT: 9057358
CMSSW: CMSSW_14_1_X_2024-07-03-1100/el8_amd64_gcc12
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/45370/40204/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

• DAS Queries: The DAS query tests failed, see the summary page for details.

Comparison Summary

There are some workflows for which there are errors in the baseline:
29634.911 step 2
The results for the comparisons for these workflows could be incomplete
This means most likely that the IB is having errors in the relvals.The error does NOT come from this pull request

Summary:

• You potentially removed 25 lines from the logs
• ROOTFileChecks: Some differences in event products or their sizes found
• Reco comparison results: 3 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 46
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3148602
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3148579
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 45 files compared)
• Checked 194 log files, 159 edm output root files, 46 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[bsunanda]

@srimanob Please do not remove D94 which is the only one using HFNose

[bsunanda]

-1

[srimanob]

Hi @bsunanda

It would be great if you can provide the timeline of your comment in #43251 (comment) ? You mentioned that "Also we need to keep a scenario with C20. If D94 is to be deleted we have to create one with C20 as D111". I also mention in the description of this PR that we need that, I did not ignore the request, but no timeline provided on geometry side.

Is it straightforward to create new geometry with C20? The goal of the cleanup is to completely remove geometry with I14 and I15.

Thx.

[srimanob]

I make a draft PR of D115 which is D110 with C20 (C18+HFNose)

[bsunanda]

Please do not make that one. I am making one myself. I am committing it now

…

________________________________ From: Phat Srimanobhas ***@***.***> Sent: 04 July 2024 16:01 To: cms-sw/cmssw ***@***.***> Cc: Sunanda Banerjee ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [cms-sw/cmssw] Clean up Phase-2 Geometry D86, D88, D91, D92, D93, D94, D97 (PR #45370) I make a draft PR<#45372> of D115 which is D110 with C20 (C18+HFNose) — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#45370 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABGMZOQXNYNIRYSWG6JZNYDZKUQA7AVCNFSM6AAAAABKKBBSA2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMBYGY2DMNJZHA>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[AdrianoDee]

+pdmv

[bsunanda]

+geometry

[antoniovilela]

+1

[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 be automatically merged.

[mmusich]

@srimanob after this PR a bunch of unit tests relying on deprecated geometries have started to fail, see logs.
For next clean-up a full cmssw test would be commendable.

[srimanob]

@srimanob after this PR a bunch of unit tests relying on deprecated geometries have started to fail, see logs. For next clean-up a full cmssw test would be commendable.

Thx Marco. Sorry for that. I have on my list to update the placeholder of geometry, but I have not managed it.

[mmusich]

Sorry for that. I have on my list to update the placeholder of geometry, but I have not managed it.

No problem, I can give it a try.

[srimanob]

We have these four placeholders that you can use. By the way, it is still D98. If you would use it, you may consider to move it to D110.

1. https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Configuration/Geometry/python/GeometryExtended2026DefaultReco_cff.py
2. https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Configuration/Geometry/python/GeometryExtended2026Default_cff.py
3. https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Configuration/Geometry/python/GeometryDD4hepExtended2026DefaultReco_cff.py
4. https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Configuration/Geometry/python/GeometryDD4hepExtended2026Default_cff.py

[mmusich]

We have these four placeholders that you can use. By the way, it is still D98. If you would use it, you may consider to move it to D110.

I have opened #45764 as a draft. Some tests still fail after moving to the newest geometry (D110). Some more work is needed to make them run (or they could fall-back to some earlier Tracker geometry without the sensor splitting in TBPX Layer1).