[15.0.X] Strip overlap check for different product ID

[mmasciov]

PR description:

Backport of #48403

As per title.
The possibility to produce strip clusters with different algorithm was discussed in https://its.cern.ch/jira/browse/CMSHLT-3534 for HLT in 2025-2026.
As other developments are in the pipeline, this possibility is currently on hold.
However, it would not be technically possible without this PR.
In fact, this PR introduces the possibility to check strip overlaps for different product IDs.
This is fully transparent for the current HLT scenario, as well as for offline (see below).

PR validation:

HLT tracking: https://uaf-10.t2.ucsd.edu/~mmasciov/TRKPOG/HLT2025/HLT_TTbarPU_TrackListMergerTest_mkFitDR/plots_hlt.html
Offline tracking: https://uaf-10.t2.ucsd.edu/~mmasciov/TRKPOG/HLT2025/MTVOffline_TTbarPU_TrackListMergerTest/

Offline tracking timing is also NOT affected: https://uaf-10.t2.ucsd.edu/~mmasciov/TRKPOG/HLT2025/MTVOffline_TTbarPU_TrackListMergerTest/plots_timing.html

FYI, @cms-sw/tracking-pog-l2, @slava77

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mmasciov for CMSSW_15_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

• DataFormats/TrackerRecHit2D (reconstruction)

@cmsbuild, @jfernan2, @mandrenguyen can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@VinInn, @VourMa, @gpetruc, @missirol, @mmusich, @mtosi, @rovere 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

[cmsbuild]

cms-bot internal usage

[jfernan2]

please test

[cmsbuild]

+1

Size: This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b8d8d0/46914/summary.html
COMMIT: 0a8bcce
CMSSW: CMSSW_15_0_X_2025-06-25-1100/el8_amd64_gcc12
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/48404/46914/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially removed 3 lines from the logs
• Reco comparison results: 34 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 51
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 4124122
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1269
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 4122833
• 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

[jfernan2]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_15_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_15_1_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @rappoccio, @antoniovilela, @sextonkennedy, @mandrenguyen (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[mmusich]

@cms-sw/tracking-pog-l2

As other developments are in the pipeline, this possibility is currently on hold.

I'd like to have clarified if tracking POG considers this PR necessary or not for a possible update of the 2025 HLT data-taking menu (see ticket CMSHLT-3534) in V1.3 (deadline for tickets Jul 23rd). Said in other words, shall we strive to have it in the next release?

[mmasciov]

@cms-sw/tracking-pog-l2

As other developments are in the pipeline, this possibility is currently on hold.

I'd like to have clarified if tracking POG considers this PR necessary or not for a possible update of the 2025 HLT data-taking menu (see ticket CMSHLT-3534) in V1.3 (deadline for tickets Jul 23rd). Said in other words, shall we strive to have it in the next release?

If PR #47629 is not in (the PR is under review; using #47629 would be the best scenario for the Tracking POG), then the strategy depicted in https://its.cern.ch/jira/browse/CMSHLT-3534 should be considered, and for that this PR is required. As the PR doesn't have any impact on physics as is, is there a reason not to have this in the release?

[mmusich]

As the PR doesn't have any impact on physics as is, is there a reason not to have this in the release?

on the contrary, I am intending to push it.