Migrate BeamSpotDeviceProducer and HcalDigisSoAProducer to rely on implicit host-to-device copy

[makortel]

PR description:

Making use of the functionality added in #47111

Resolves cms-sw/framework-team#1209

PR validation:

Code compiles

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-47226/43506

• There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:
  • File EventFilter/HcalRawToDigi/plugins/alpaka/HcalDigisSoAProducer.cc modified in PR(s): Migrate Alpaka EDProducers to pass the edm::ParameterSet to base class constructor #47216
  • File RecoVertex/BeamSpotProducer/plugins/alpaka/BeamSpotDeviceProducer.cc modified in PR(s): Migrate Alpaka EDProducers to pass the edm::ParameterSet to base class constructor #47216

[cmsbuild]

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

It involves the following packages:

• EventFilter/HcalRawToDigi (reconstruction)
• RecoVertex/BeamSpotProducer (reconstruction, alca)

@atpathak, @cmsbuild, @consuegs, @jfernan2, @mandrenguyen, @perrotta can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@GiacomoSguazzoni, @Martin-Grunewald, @VinInn, @VourMa, @abdoulline, @bsunanda, @dgulhan, @fabiocos, @francescobrivio, @martinamalberti, @missirol, @mmusich, @mtosi, @rovere, @rsreds, @tocheng, @yuanchao 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

[makortel]

enable gpu

[makortel]

@cmsbuild, please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Size: This PR adds an extra 24KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9750de/44108/summary.html
COMMIT: bed107f
CMSSW: CMSSW_15_0_X_2025-01-31-1100/el8_amd64_gcc12
Additional Tests: GPU
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/47226/44108/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially removed 2 lines from the logs
• Reco comparison results: 36 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 51
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 4130681
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1348
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 4129313
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 50 files compared)
• Checked 222 log files, 194 edm output root files, 51 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

GPU Comparison Summary

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 7
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 53071
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 53
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 53018
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 6 files compared)
• Checked 24 log files, 30 edm output root files, 7 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[jfernan2]

+1

[makortel]

assign heterogeneous

[cmsbuild]

New categories assigned: heterogeneous

@fwyzard,@makortel you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks

[makortel]

CPU comparison differences are related to #39803 and #47071

GPU comparison differences are in pixel tracking, except 12834.422 and 12834.423 show differences in ParticleFlow. @fwyzard Do we have a known non-reproducibility in PF GPU code?

[fwyzard]

Do we have a known non-reproducibility in PF GPU code?

Not that I remember.

@jsamudio ?

[fwyzard]

@makortel the changes are fine.
Do you mind if I run some benchmarks (next week) before signing ?

[makortel]

Do you mind if I run some benchmarks (next week) before signing ?

No, go ahead. It would be nice to get this in pre3, but a backport PR would be trivial as well.

[makortel]

Do we have a known non-reproducibility in PF GPU code?

Not that I remember.

@jsamudio ?

I opened an issue #47233 as I saw these also in another test

[perrotta]

+alca

[makortel]

hold

#47233 (comment) showed this PR actually leads to a change (details still to be investigated)

[cmsbuild]

Pull request has been put on hold by @makortel
They need to issue an unhold command to remove the hold state or L1 can unhold it for all

[makortel]

unhold

#47233 (comment) showed this PR actually leads to a change (details still to be investigated)

The cause has been identified elsewhere (#47233 (comment))

(although now there is a merge conflict, effectively need to wait for the next IB)