Baseline for Hermetic Timing Demo (SLHC)

[lgray]

@mark-grimes I have to revise the plan a little bit from yesterday, I (unfortunately) remembered that the ToT digitization for HGCal never made it in since it was a late development. Therefore, in order to have all the fast timing information needed it is necessary to make a full new release anyway.

While at it, it seemed prudent to bring in the 4D vertex reconstruction as well, as it exists in SLHCDEV.
I have a person branch that has more developments here, but that can come later.

This PR is therefore a straight side-port of #11770.

I request that this be merged and a new release be cut, pursuant to the plan for fast timing laid out yesterday in the Upgrade Studies meeting.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @lgray (Lindsey Gray) for CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC.

Baseline for Hermetic Timing Demo (SLHC)

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/StandardSequences
DataFormats/GeometryCommonDetAlgo
DataFormats/HGCDigi
DataFormats/VertexReco
IOMC/EventVertexGenerators
RecoFTL/FastTimingKludge
RecoLocalCalo/HGCalRecAlgos
RecoLocalCalo/HGCalRecProducers
RecoParticleFlow/PFClusterProducer
RecoParticleFlow/PandoraTranslator
RecoVertex/GaussianSumVertexFit
RecoVertex/PrimaryVertexProducer
RecoVertex/VertexPrimitives
SimCalorimetry/HGCSimProducers
SimG4CMS/Calo
SimG4Core/Application
SimGeneral/MixingModule
TrackingTools/TransientTrack
Validation/HGCalValidation

The following packages do not have a category, yet:

RecoFTL/FastTimingKludge
RecoParticleFlow/PandoraTranslator
SimCalorimetry/HGCSimProducers

@civanch, @cvuosalo, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @deguio, @slava77, @danduggan, @vanbesien, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @abbiendi, @kpedro88, @argiro, @Martin-Grunewald, @bsunanda, @pfs, @mmarionncern, @sethzenz, @battibass, @makortel, @jhgoh, @cerati, @trocino, @vandreev11, @wmtan, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @cseez, @bellan, @dgulhan, @gpetruc, @istaslis, @bachtis this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' or '@cmsbuild, please test' in the first line of a comment.
@fratnikov, @mark-grimes you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[mark-grimes]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/9526/console

[cmsbuild]

-1

Tested at: 27b7ff4
I found errors in the following unit tests:

---> test runtestPhysicsToolsPatAlgos had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafExamples had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopEventProducers had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopEventSelection had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopHitFit had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopJetCombination had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopKinFitter had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopTools had ERRORS
---> test runtestUtilAlgos had ERRORS

you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12290/9526/summary.html

[mark-grimes]

To explain the delay, @davidlange6 is liaising with upgrade hierarchy to find out production needs and hence offline support requirements.

[mark-grimes]

This addition was approved in the 12/Nov upgrade performance studies meeting, apologies for the delay. All unit test failures are from the missing 'startup' key and unrelated to this PR, except runtestUtilAlgos which is a missing file nothing to do with this PR (#11984 would fix the first issue but I need to modify that PR).

@lgray for a full release the name FastTimingKludge is going to have to change. Also, introducing a new RecoFTL package for a single subpackage is a little unnecessary. I'll have a look for a suitable place to put it but suggest one if you have a better idea. I will also rename in SLHCDEV once this is merged for consistency.
Also need to be stricter about the couts, e.g. TrackTimeValueMapProducer.cc line 249 and if( debug ) cout... should go to LogDebug.

[lgray]

Hi Mark, OK It is no problem to change the name. If anything I could put
the FastTimingKludge package into RecoParticleFlow/HermeticTiming, I think
it would be fitting. This package will definitely expand in the future.

I'll change the LogDebug.

Thanks,
-L

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Mark Grimes [email protected]
wrote:

This addition was approved in the 12/Nov upgrade performance studies
meeting, apologies for the delay. All unit test failures are from the
missing 'startup' key and unrelated to this PR, except runtestUtilAlgos
which is a missing file nothing to do with this PR (#11984
#11984 would fix the first issue
but I need to modify that PR).

@lgray https://github.com/lgray for a full release the name
FastTimingKludge is going to have to change. Also, introducing a new
RecoFTL package for a single subpackage is a little unnecessary. I'll have
a look for a suitable place to put it but suggest one if you have a better
idea. I will also rename in SLHCDEV once this is merged for consistency.
Also need to be stricter about the couts, e.g. TrackTimeValueMapProducer.cc
line 249
https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/pull/12290/files#diff-0278f86d3818f20ebcbb6393c3519d68R249
and if( debug ) cout... should go to LogDebug.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#12290 (comment).

[lgray]

@mark-grimes Does this sound good to you? If so I'll take care of it tomorrow morning.

[mark-grimes]

Sounds ideal to me, I can change SLHCDEV to match once this is in. If this goes into 8_0_X (which I hope it will eventually) I suspect they will want some unit tests on the error matrices, but that's just my speculation. After this PR is anything else necessary before cutting a release?

Just to reiterate the official Offline position - 6_2_X_SLHC is closed to new developments except for exceptional cases like this.

[lgray]

@cmsbuild please test

@mark-grimes This should satisfy your code review requests.

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/9701/console

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #12290 was updated. @civanch, @cvuosalo, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @deguio, @slava77, @danduggan, @vanbesien, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

[lgray]

@mark-grimes To answer all your questions. This is all that is needed to cut a release. Another release following the developments from step 1 will be needed but that is not until next year.

[cmsbuild]

-1

Tested at: cac529d
I found errors in the following unit tests:

---> test runtestPhysicsToolsPatAlgos had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopEventProducers had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopTools had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopKinFitter had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopEventSelection had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopJetCombination had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafTopHitFit had ERRORS
---> test runtestTqafExamples had ERRORS
---> test runtestUtilAlgos had ERRORS

you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12290/9701/summary.html

[mark-grimes]

merge

All test failures are from missing key or test files.