Compose caching functionality of LazySenseCalculator

[esseivaju]

As discussed in #1565, have a simple LazySenseCalculator and a front-end with caching functionality. We could probably rework the original sense calculator as an EagerSenseCalculator.

[sethrj]

Nifty! (A test would be good.)

[esseivaju]

I think we don't have any tests for SenseCalculator yet? It's indirectly tested through the SimpleUnitTracker. I can add that and will also update the documentation.

[github-actions]

Test summary

 4 215 files   6 517 suites   15m 1s ⏱️
 1 676 tests  1 670 ✅  6 💤 0 ❌
22 970 runs  22 890 ✅ 80 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit 5dacc44.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[sethrj]

@esseivaju https://github.com/celeritas-project/celeritas/blob/develop/test/orange/univ/detail/SenseCalculator.test.cc ? I guess I missed that you didn't add a "lazy" calculator test in the previous PR. Could you please add both?

[esseivaju]

Okay I think we're good now

[esseivaju]

Comparing the previous develop run (6ec7f84):

Problem	Geometry	GPU [1/s]	CPU [1/s]	GPU+G4 [1/s]
atlas-tilecal	orange	1.12 (±0.00)	0.09 (±0.00)	1.04 (±0.01)
cms-hgcal	orange	0.64 (±0.00)	0.06 (±0.00)	0.59 (±0.00)
testem15	orange	8.25 (±0.05)	0.43 (±0.00)	6.29 (±0.07)
testem15+field	orange	7.80 (±0.04)	0.39 (±0.00)	5.85 (±0.04)
testem15+field+msc	orange	6.55 (±0.02)	0.34 (±0.00)	5.18 (±0.06)
testem3-composite+field+msc	orange	1.05 (±0.00)	0.11 (±0.00)	1.18 (±0.01)
testem3-composite+msc	orange	2.14 (±0.00)	0.12 (±0.00)	1.88 (±0.00)
testem3-expanded+field+msc	orange	1.05 (±0.01)	0.11 (±0.00)	1.18 (±0.01)
testem3-flat	orange	2.98 (±0.00)	0.19 (±0.00)	2.72 (±0.02)
testem3-flat+field	orange	2.15 (±0.01)	0.18 (±0.00)	2.13 (±0.00)
testem3-flat+field+msc	orange	1.21 (±0.00)	0.12 (±0.00)	1.39 (±0.00)
testem3-flat+msc	orange	2.20 (±0.00)	0.13 (±0.00)	1.98 (±0.00)

and switching to LazySenseCalculator except for complex_intersect which still uses SenseCalculator to store senses:

Problem	Geometry	GPU [1/s]	CPU [1/s]	GPU+G4 [1/s]
atlas-tilecal	orange	1.22 (±0.00)	0.10 (±0.00)	1.11 (±0.00)
cms-hgcal	orange	0.69 (±0.00)	0.07 (±0.00)	0.63 (±0.00)
testem15	orange	8.36 (±0.05)	0.43 (±0.00)	6.26 (±0.24)
testem15+field	orange	7.88 (±0.04)	0.39 (±0.00)	5.96 (±0.10)
testem15+field+msc	orange	6.56 (±0.02)	0.34 (±0.00)	5.13 (±0.08)
testem3-composite+field+msc	orange	1.05 (±0.00)	0.11 (±0.00)	1.17 (±0.01)
testem3-composite+msc	orange	2.15 (±0.00)	0.13 (±0.00)	1.86 (±0.00)
testem3-expanded+field+msc	orange	1.05 (±0.01)	0.12 (±0.00)	1.18 (±0.00)
testem3-flat	orange	3.30 (±0.01)	0.19 (±0.00)	2.96 (±0.01)
testem3-flat+field	orange	2.31 (±0.01)	0.17 (±0.00)	2.20 (±0.01)
testem3-flat+field+msc	orange	1.25 (±0.01)	0.12 (±0.00)	1.44 (±0.01)
testem3-flat+msc	orange	2.37 (±0.00)	0.13 (±0.00)	2.09 (±0.00)

[sethrj]

Awesome! Great refactor, excellent parameterized test.

[sethrj]

@esseivaju Did you happen to check whether the register/local usage changes?

[esseivaju]

• Initialize-tracks: local memory down from 184 to 176
• along-step-general-linear-propagate-linear and along-step-neutral: registers up from 122 to 126
• geo-boundary: local memory up from 128 to 152