Code performance improvements in follow-up to #31722

[ericcano]

PR description:

CMSSW #31722 Patatrack integration - Pixel track reconstruction (10/N) was merged with extra comments to be addressed.

This PR addresses the performance related comments.

PR validation:

The code was run in workflows (step3 and step4):

• 11634.501 (CPU)
• 11634.502 (GPU)
• 11634.505 (CPU)
• 11634.506 (GPU)

The workflow results where then compared using the plots generated by makeTrackValidationPlots.py. The CPU workflows gave results identical to the baseline integration build. The GPU workflows displayed slight variations, but the variations are also present between multiple runs of the same version (baseline or this branch).

Unit tests were fine except one problem not related the this branch and followed up in #33797

[cmsbuild]

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33864/22894

• This PR adds an extra 32KB to repository

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

  • File RecoPixelVertexing/PixelTrackFitting/interface/BrokenLine.h modified in PR(s): Code cleanliness improvements in follow-up to #31722 #33865

Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)

• code-format:
  https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33864/22894/code-format.patch
  e.g. curl https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33864/22894/code-format.patch | patch -p1
  You can also run scram build code-format to apply code format directly

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33864/22897

• This PR adds an extra 32KB to repository

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

  • File RecoPixelVertexing/PixelTrackFitting/interface/BrokenLine.h modified in PR(s): Code cleanliness improvements in follow-up to #31722 #33865

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @ericcano (Eric Cano) for master.

It involves the following packages:

RecoPixelVertexing/PixelTrackFitting

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

cms-bot commands are listed here

[VinInn]

most of the changes affect Rienman fit that is not default.

1. My understanding is that Rienmann fit has NOT been tested against original patatrack version after integration.
   1a) It has to be done prior to any regression test of this PR
2. Does a wf exist to test it?
3. How do we know that the proposed changes are indeed a performance improvements?

[slava77]

1. My understanding is that Rienmann fit has NOT been tested against original patatrack version after integration.

is it possible to add a test then?

[slava77]

This branch has conflicts that must be resolved

Conflicting files
RecoPixelVertexing/PixelTrackFitting/interface/RiemannFit.h

please update, if this is till considered to be an active PR

[slava77]

@ericcano
please clarify on the status of this PR.
Thank you.

[ericcano]

@slava77 as the PR is pending testing RiemannFit, I opened an issue in patatrack (cms-patatrack#620) for creating a test, and will close it. We will re-introduce the changes when tests are available.