LST CPU Speedups

[GNiendorf]

This PR Timing (CPU) - commit 2 (pre-checks, exact trig simplifications, and additional early exits)

This PR Timing (CPU) - commit 1 (reducing redundant memory loads)

Master Timing (CPU)

[GNiendorf]

run-ci: all

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully in standalone mode running on CPU. Here are some of the comparison plots.

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

Here is a timing comparison:

   Evt    Hits       MD       LS      T3       T5       pLS       pT5      pT3      TC       Reset    Event     Short             Rate
   avg     29.0    323.1    245.5    138.1     48.6    695.7     10.9    116.6    119.7    208.9      0.1    1936.1    1211.5+/- 290.1     602.5   explicit[s=4] (target branch)
   avg     28.1    218.8    178.6    127.2     49.7    700.7     10.6    109.5     83.0    202.6      0.1    1708.9     980.1+/- 239.1     545.5   explicit[s=4] (this PR)

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully with CMSSW running on CPU. Here are some plots.

OOTB All Tracks

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

[GNiendorf]

run-ci: all
modifiers: gpu

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully in standalone mode running on GPU. Here are some of the comparison plots.

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

Here is a timing comparison:

   Evt    Hits       MD       LS      T3       T5       pLS       pT5      pT3      TC       Reset    Event     Short             Rate
   avg     31.1      0.2      0.4      0.6      0.9      0.3      0.6      0.5      0.3      1.4      0.0      36.2       4.8+/-  2.7      36.2   explicit[s=1]
   avg      1.1      0.3      0.5      0.8      1.0      0.3      0.8      0.7      0.4      1.8      0.0       7.7       6.3+/-  2.8       4.0   explicit[s=2]
   avg      2.0      0.6      0.8      1.2      1.5      0.4      1.2      1.0      0.6      2.8      0.0      12.1       9.7+/-  3.5       3.2   explicit[s=4]
   avg      3.2      0.9      1.2      1.7      2.0      0.5      1.7      1.3      0.8      3.9      0.0      17.2      13.5+/-  4.3       3.0   explicit[s=6]
   avg      3.7      1.3      1.7      2.4      2.6      0.7      2.3      1.6      1.0      4.9      0.0      22.3      17.9+/-  4.6       2.9   explicit[s=8] (target branch)
   avg     31.1      0.2      0.4      0.6      0.9      0.3      0.6      0.5      0.3      1.4      0.0      36.2       4.8+/-  2.6      36.3   explicit[s=1]
   avg      1.3      0.3      0.5      0.7      1.0      0.3      0.8      0.7      0.4      1.8      0.0       7.9       6.4+/-  2.8       4.1   explicit[s=2]
   avg      2.2      0.6      0.8      1.2      1.5      0.4      1.2      1.0      0.6      2.8      0.0      12.2       9.6+/-  3.3       3.2   explicit[s=4]
   avg      3.0      0.9      1.2      1.7      2.1      0.5      1.7      1.3      0.8      3.8      0.0      17.0      13.5+/-  4.1       3.0   explicit[s=6]
   avg      3.6      1.3      1.7      2.3      2.6      0.7      2.2      1.7      1.0      5.0      0.0      22.2      18.0+/-  4.5       2.9   explicit[s=8] (this PR)

[GNiendorf]

@slava77 I think this PR is good to go. Represents most of the boiler-plate changes of the CPU speedups PR.

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully with CMSSW running on GPU. Here are some plots.

OOTB All Tracks

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

[slava77]

the GPU variant should have one more significant digit in the component columns (the total can be still with .1.
I don't have a particluar preference for this PR or separate.

[slava77]

nice updates.
I think the comment cleanup in the MiniDoublet code is a bit too aggressive. While some removals may be clean for some tautological docs, quite a bit is going to lose clarity. Please recover

[GNiendorf]

run-ci: all

[GNiendorf]

run-ci: all

[GNiendorf]

run-ci: all
modifiers: gpu

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully in standalone mode running on CPU. Here are some of the comparison plots.

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

Here is a timing comparison:

   Evt    Hits       MD       LS      T3       T5       pLS       pT5      pT3      TC       Reset    Event     Short             Rate
   avg     28.2    324.2    243.0    136.6     47.8    698.4     10.9    114.7    118.8    208.7      0.1    1931.4    1204.8+/- 289.9     596.7   explicit[s=4] (target branch)
   avg     31.1    219.2    182.6    133.5     47.6    698.9     10.8    110.7     83.1    185.9      0.1    1703.5     973.4+/- 227.2     541.9   explicit[s=4] (this PR)

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully with CMSSW running on GPU. Here are some plots.

OOTB All Tracks

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully with CMSSW running on CPU. Here are some plots.

OOTB All Tracks

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully in standalone mode running on GPU. Here are some of the comparison plots.

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

Here is a timing comparison:

   Evt    Hits       MD       LS      T3       T5       pLS       pT5      pT3      TC       Reset    Event     Short             Rate
   avg     32.5      0.2      0.4      0.6      0.9      0.3      0.6      0.5      0.3      1.4      0.0      37.6       4.8+/-  2.6      37.6   explicit[s=1]
   avg      1.1      0.4      0.5      0.8      1.0      0.3      0.8      0.7      0.4      1.8      0.0       7.8       6.4+/-  2.9       4.0   explicit[s=2]
   avg      1.8      0.6      0.8      1.1      1.5      0.4      1.2      1.0      0.6      2.8      0.0      11.9       9.7+/-  3.5       3.1   explicit[s=4]
   avg      2.6      0.9      1.3      1.7      2.0      0.5      1.7      1.2      0.8      3.9      0.0      16.6      13.5+/-  4.1       2.9   explicit[s=6]
   avg      3.4      1.3      1.7      2.3      2.6      0.7      2.3      1.6      1.0      5.0      0.0      21.9      17.8+/-  4.5       2.8   explicit[s=8] (target branch)
   avg     32.6      0.2      0.4      0.6      0.8      0.3      0.6      0.5      0.3      1.4      0.0      37.7       4.8+/-  2.5      37.7   explicit[s=1]
   avg      1.2      0.4      0.5      0.8      1.0      0.3      0.8      0.8      0.4      1.9      0.0       7.9       6.5+/-  2.8       4.1   explicit[s=2]
   avg      1.8      0.6      0.8      1.1      1.5      0.4      1.2      1.0      0.6      2.8      0.0      11.8       9.6+/-  3.5       3.1   explicit[s=4]
   avg      2.6      1.0      1.2      1.7      2.0      0.5      1.7      1.3      0.8      4.0      0.0      16.7      13.6+/-  4.0       2.9   explicit[s=6]
   avg      3.4      1.3      1.7      2.2      2.6      0.7      2.2      1.7      1.0      5.0      0.0      21.9      17.8+/-  4.5       2.8   explicit[s=8] (this PR)

[GNiendorf]

run-ci: all

[GNiendorf]

run-ci: all

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully in standalone mode running on CPU. Here are some of the comparison plots.

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

Here is a timing comparison:

   Evt    Hits       MD       LS      T3       T5       pLS       pT5      pT3      TC       Reset    Event     Short             Rate
   avg     28.1    323.5    241.8    135.2     47.5    698.0     10.9    114.9    117.5    208.1      0.1    1925.6    1199.5+/- 290.5     596.4   explicit[s=4] (target branch)
   avg     31.1    103.1    122.0    122.9     49.6    684.4     11.0     40.2     69.3    212.6      0.1    1446.4     730.8+/- 189.1     479.6   explicit[s=4] (this PR)

[github-actions]

The PR was built and ran successfully with CMSSW running on CPU. Here are some plots.

OOTB All Tracks

The full set of validation and comparison plots can be found here.

[slava77]

it would be good to get some rough accounting of the speedups bu the category/type of changes (from a rough look at the code: early loop exit, moving variables early in nested loops, moving compute closest to use after the cuts, dPhi xy1,2, module data and hit data pre-loading to structs)

while some changes are rather clear expected speedups, some other are less so.
Ideally, before squashing everything to a single commit it would've been better to trace a sequence of improvements in finer chunks.

[slava77]

how large is the overlap in values between the MD-related and other module data?
It looks like this is a case for using AoS (plain old array): 1-2 cache line fetches will get the full MD data, compared to our current SoA mostly unused reads for modules

Also, consider to reorder by size at least partially to avoid padding