Phase1 (2015 + Pixel Phase1) Workflow up to Reco

[boudoul]

This PR is modifying the 2017 scenario workflow to make it run till the reconstruction .
This is part of merging the upgrade code in &X cycle.

At this point it fails at the tracking step (*).
The geometry and local reco should now be validated while the reco step needs a bit more work.
Recipe : RunTheMatrix --what upgrade -l 10000

Run1/run2 workflows and code are unchanged.

@threus , @venturia , @atricomi, @rovere , @makortel , @vinn, @veszpv, @atricomi, @mark-grimes : FYI

(*)An exception of category 'Configuration' occurred while
[0] Constructing the EventProcessor
[1] Constructing module: class=SeedGeneratorFromRegionHitsEDProducer label='initialStepSeeds'
Exception Message:
MissingParameter: ParameterSet 'SeedCreatorPSet' not found.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @boudoul (boudoul) for CMSSW_7_4_X.

Phase1 (2015 + Pixel Phase1) Workflow up to Reco

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/PyReleaseValidation
Geometry/CMSCommonData
RecoTracker/ConversionSeedGenerators
SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Configuration
SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Geometry

@civanch, @Dr15Jones, @cvuosalo, @boudoul, @ianna, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @srimanob, @nclopezo, @franzoni, @slava77, @ktf can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @Martin-Grunewald, @makortel, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @appeltel, @gpetruc, @cerati, @dgulhan, @venturia 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' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[ianna]

@boudoul - I think, it's a wrong HCAL for 2017.

[makortel]

I took a look on the failure in SeedGeneratorFromRegionHitsEDProducer (couldn't resist...), and it originates from QuadrupletSeedMerger as a result of #3211. The reason is that SeedGeneratorFromRegionHitsEDProducer passes the SeedCreatorPSet to QuadrupletSeedMerger, that erroneously tries to get a PSet with the same name out of it.

I have a fix for it in 6a362ba, but it is not the only problem in reco. I can continue to debug them, but how should we integrate the fixes (cherry-pick here or separate PR after this one is merged)?

[boudoul]

@makortel fantastic thanks!
I would suggest then to close this PR and you can make a new one (which should include my original changes, includes the comments already adressed in this PR + all your findings for the reco ) , it would make them something consistent . but happy with any other suggestions

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: d5fed55
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-7625/2469/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-7625/2469/summary.html

[makortel]

Since there were no other suggestions, I created #7645 with my tracking fixes on top of this PR (now the workflow fails with something else). Regarding my comments above (#7625 (comment)), I decided to go with the refToPSet_ approach.

@rovere @VinInn I realized that the removal of pixelTracks and pixelVertices affects also the Phase1 configuration. Should we add them back there (to be consistent with the configuration in 62X_SLHC)?