Fix to T35 Phase2 Tracker Geometry Module Counts in SimplePixelTopology.h

[AdrianoDee]

PR description:

This PR proposes a fix to update the layerStart taking into account the updated module splitting in barrel pixel layer one. Now, with #47611 this would become obsolete and the fix is also included in that PR itself. It could be anyway useful to have this single fix integrated separately so that the bot tests in #47611 could eventually show any genuine discrepancy w.r.t. master.

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[cmsbuild]

-code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-48271/45106

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:
  • File Geometry/CommonTopologies/interface/SimplePixelTopology.h modified in PR(s): CA Extension to strips #47090, A More Flexible And Lightweight CA #47611

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-48271/45106/code-format.patch
  e.g. curl -k https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-48271/45106/code-format.patch | patch -p1
  You can also run scram build code-format to apply code format directly

[AdrianoDee]

test parameters:

• relvals_opt = --what upgrade
• workflow = 29634.751

[AdrianoDee]

please test

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-48271/45107

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:
  • File Geometry/CommonTopologies/interface/SimplePixelTopology.h modified in PR(s): CA Extension to strips #47090, A More Flexible And Lightweight CA #47611

[cmsbuild]

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

It involves the following packages:

• Geometry/CommonTopologies (geometry)

@Dr15Jones, @bsunanda, @civanch, @kpedro88, @makortel, @mdhildreth can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@VinInn, @VourMa, @bsunanda, @fabiocos, @martinamalberti, @mmusich, @mtosi this is something you requested to watch as well.
@antoniovilela, @mandrenguyen, @rappoccio, @sextonkennedy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mmusich]

type bug-fix

[cmsbuild]

+1

Size: This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-c3ada5/46601/summary.html
COMMIT: c9b9516
CMSSW: CMSSW_15_1_X_2025-06-08-0000/el8_amd64_gcc12
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/48271/46601/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially added 4 lines to the logs
• Reco comparison results: 7 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 51
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 4074129
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1220
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 3
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 4072886
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 50 files compared)
• Checked 218 log files, 186 edm output root files, 51 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[mmusich]

@cms-sw/geometry-l2 please take a look.

[AdrianoDee]

Hi @cms-sw/geometry-l2 any thoughts on this? Thanks!

[civanch]

@bsunanda , we have migrated from D110 to D121, so this fix become not urgent but we have to conclude about this PR to merge it or to close. What is your point of view? I would merge allowing to run D110.

[mmusich]

we have migrated from D110 to D121, so this fix become not urgent

On the contrary the fix is urgent because the tracker geometry has not changed between D110 and D121, so this is still relevant.

[AdrianoDee]

I've updated the description to be more clear.

Then, even if it is well beyond the scope of this PR, let me add one point with the pdmv hat: while the next-to-be baseline geometry is D121, until it's properly validated, D110 has still to be considered the current baseline. If you want to have a campaign for D121 validation please open an issue in https://gitlab.cern.ch/cms-ppd/dataset-management/special-relvals-requests/-/issues/.

[civanch]

@AdrianoDee , thanks, we will do request for the new geometry default when some issues with updated Phase2 geometry will be understood. @bsunanda is working on that. For the time being I would sign this PR.

[civanch]

+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 now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @rappoccio, @mandrenguyen, @sextonkennedy, @antoniovilela (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[AdrianoDee]

Thanks @civanch !

[mandrenguyen]

+1