add specialized ZeroBias relval steps and use them for 2022 and 2023 data workflows, in order to employ @rerecoZeroBias DQM sequence

[mmusich]

PR description:

Title says it all. It was recently re-discovered that in the 2022 and 2023 data workflows since the @standardDQM* sequence is run also in the ZeroBias PDs there is no dedicated trigger bits filtering in the Tracker and Tracking sequences, leading (among other things) to have plots of track multiplicity in which there are events with no tracks, see for example:

coming from the recent 2023Bvs2023C PdmV campaign.
In this PR I correct the situation by specializing the ZeroBias workflows to run a DQM sequence which contains the @rerecoZeroBias* instead in the first and harvesting DQM step.
This would help using ZeroBias consistently in the future data release validations.

PR validation:

none.

If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:

Not a backport, to be partially backported.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-42031/36003

• This PR adds an extra 60KB to repository

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

  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_standard.py modified in PR(s): More Configurable Pixel Tracks and HIon Template #41632, Nm dqm egamma v update for13 1 x #41987
  • File Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_steps.py modified in PR(s): More Configurable Pixel Tracks and HIon Template #41632, Nm dqm egamma v update for13 1 x #41987, Add prototype HcalNanoAOD #41607, Migrate Phase-2 geometry to D98 #41946

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for master.

It involves the following packages:

• Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (pdmv, upgrade)

@bbilin, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @kskovpen, @sunilUIET can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @kpedro88, @Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @fabiocos, @slomeo this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[mmusich]

test parameters:

• workflows = 140.003,140.023,140.043,140.063,140.072,140.104,141.002

[mmusich]

@cmsbuild, please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-1393bb/33282/summary.html
COMMIT: 551d666
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_2_X_2023-06-20-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/42031/33282/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially added 220 lines to the logs
• Reco comparison results: 5 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 54
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3537535
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 11687
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3525826
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 86775.902 KiB( 53 files compared)
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): 14484.059 KiB Tracking/TrackParameters
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): 3543.336 KiB Tracking/V0Monitoring
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): 1162.402 KiB L1TEMU/L1TObjects
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): 1160.753 KiB L1T/L1TObjects
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): -44.137 KiB Btag/IPTag_ETA_1v4-2v5
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): -43.656 KiB Btag/IPTag_ETA_0-1v4
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): -42.936 KiB Btag/IPTag_GLOBAL
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): 42.250 KiB Tracking/PrimaryVertices
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): 28.879 KiB SiStrip/MechanicalView
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003,... ): -4.175 KiB Btag/JP_ETA_1v4-2v5
• DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.003 ): ...
• Checked 235 log files, 181 edm output root files, 54 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[slava77]

not to be backported

I suspect that we may need to backport.

@cms-sw/ppd-l2
Are the cross-era comparisons going to still be done in the data taking release (13_0)? If so, we better make a backport. Otherwise the hope is for PDMV to submit ZB with manual modifications.

[mmusich]

I suspect that we may need to backport.

it cannot be a verbatim backport, because the 2023 data workflows aren't there in CMSSW_13_0_X:

cmssw/Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_steps.py

Lines 566 to 569 in 60cfb53

	steps['RunMuonEG2022E']={'INPUT':InputInfo(dataSet='/MuonEG/Run2022E-v1/RAW',label='2022E',events=100000,location='STD', ls=Run2022E_LS200)}
	# Highstat HLTPhysics
	Run2015DHS=selectedLS([258712,258713,258714,258741,258742,258745,258749,258750,259626,259637,259683,259685,259686,259721,259809,259810,259818,259820,259821,259822,259862,259890,259891])

unless we backport also #41629

[malbouis]

Hi @mmusich , @slava77 , I agree it makes sense to have both PRs backported.

[srimanob]

+Upgrade

[sunilUIET]

+pdmv

[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. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[rappoccio]

+1