Update FitWithRooFit in Alignment/OfflineValidation to fix memory leaks

[guitargeek]

PR description:

• Avoid memory leak of RooDataHist by wrapping it in unique_ptr

• Avoid memory leaks of RooRealVars also by wrapping in unique_ptr

• Avoid leaking RooAbsPdf models also with unique_ptr

• Avoid memory leak of model components by passing ownership to the top-level pdf via RooAbsArg::addOwnedComponents()

• Use double instead of const double& for function parameters

• Avoid a leaking fit result because of the Save() command argument to fitTo() (if one uses Save(), the fitting routine returns a RooFitResult * that needs to be deleted)

PR validation:

I could do no validation of this refactoring and memory leak fixing work. It should not change any code behavior, but it would be nice if an alignment expert could validate it.

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:

No backport intended.

[cmsbuild]

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-42900/37047

• This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

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

  • File Alignment/OfflineValidation/interface/FitWithRooFit.h modified in PR(s): Add missing include to FitWithRooFit.h #42899

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @guitargeek (Jonas Rembser) for master.

It involves the following packages:

• Alignment/OfflineValidation (alca)

@consuegs, @saumyaphor4252, @cmsbuild, @perrotta can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@tocheng, @tlampen, @mmusich, @adewit this is something you requested to watch as well.
@sextonkennedy, @rappoccio, @antoniovilela you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

[perrotta]

please test

[mmusich]

but it would be nice if an alignment expert could validate it

I checked this with the (limited) testing capability of the unit tests in DQMOffline/Alignment

cmssw/DQMOffline/Alignment/test/testDiMuonVertexMonitor.sh

Lines 12 to 13 in 8efd906

	cmsRun ${SCRAM_TEST_PATH}/DiMuonTkAlDQMValidator_cfg.py resonance=Z || die "Failure using DiMuonTkAlDQMValidator_cfg.py resonance=Z" $?
	cmsRun ${SCRAM_TEST_PATH}/DiMuonTkAlDQMHarvester_cfg.py resonance=Z || die "Failure using DiMuonTkAlDQMHarvester_cfg.py resonance=Z" $?

I put the results here. I don't see anomalies.

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-8e42f5/34966/summary.html
COMMIT: c3476eb
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_3_X_2023-09-28-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/42900/34966/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

• You potentially removed 1 lines from the logs
• Reco comparison results: 8 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 50
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3358320
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 6
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3358292
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 49 files compared)
• Checked 214 log files, 167 edm output root files, 50 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[perrotta]

+1

• See also Update FitWithRooFit in Alignment/OfflineValidation to fix memory leaks #42900 (comment)

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

[antoniovilela]

+1