-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
UFS-dev PR#153 #125
UFS-dev PR#153 #125
Conversation
* Metafile cleanup * Move rte-rrtmgp submodule * Re-organization of physical parameterizations into process and scheme subdirectories * Modifications to CCPP metadata files to accommodate source file location changes * File location update referenced in CMEPS
…build system to allow CMAKE_<COMPILER>_FLAGS to be specified for submodules ufs-community#2052 (ufs-community#2013) * bmark time increase * spack-stack-151 & common updates * switch to fms/2023.02.01 * remove gaea c4 * switch to fv3/use_fms_mpp Reverts gaea TPN statement, this includes gaea c5 in its configuration. * WCOSS2 LUA changes to match updates in spack-stack 1.5.1 * Fixing CMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS to be passed from top level to submodules * fixed c flags for cice * turn off some gnu cases: hercules/gnu issue * Bring in lua changes on Acorn --------- Co-authored-by: Brian Curtis <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Mark A Potts <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: jkbk2004 <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: zach1221 <[email protected]>
…2069) (ufs-community#2027) * update CICE * update CICE source file list * updates to ice_in.IN for use in global applications --------- Co-authored-by: Rahul Mahajan <[email protected]>
…dd stochastic physics pattern update frequency options within SPP and LNDP ('sppint' and 'lndpint') ufs-community#2077 + Updates to ufs.configure for use in global applications ufs-community#2074 + Doc Updates ufs-community#2030 (ufs-community#2080) * Update MOM6 to its main repository 20231218 updating (disable FPEs) * Updates ufs.configure templates for use in global-applications. * Adds the stochastic pattern interval (sppint) option to SPP and (lndpint) to the land perturbations (LNDP) * Doc update for LND & CDEPS Input files required for land configurations --------- Co-authored-by: “gspetro-NOAA” <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Rahul Mahajan <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Jeff <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Jong Kim <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: FernandoAndrade-NOAA <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Brian Curtis <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: zach1221 <[email protected]>
) * fix array out of bounds issue in physics aerinterpol.F90 (ufs-community/ccpp-physics#152)
Expected RT failures for 2082: New baselines are needed for all conus_13km related tests. Namely: |
Expected RT failures for 2027: 7378:001 cpld_control_p8_mixedmode_intel failed in check_result |
@grantfirl Since this PR represents a huge code reorganization, maybe it's prudent to run a quick regression test just to sanity check? |
Sure. Let's try it. |
Darn it. I forgot that one of the previous PRs required new input data to be staged, so there are some run failures. |
I staged the new file for MOM6 from ufs-community#1979, although it only looks like it should have caused one run failure (cpld_control_c48_intel). |
Okay, sounds good, if you didn't get to it in time and just that one test fails I'd call that fine. |
Oh I see now, there are a bunch of failures. Let me see what's going on there. |
Well, I think that most of the failures are expected BL changes. The first failure that came up was the cpld_control_c48_intel test and it died due to lack of the file, which triggered my memory about the input changes, but I'm waiting until the script is finished to see if there are any other run failures. It shouldn't be THAT hard to double check that the rest of the failures correspond to BL changes from previously merged PRs. I think that most were kinda light on changes anyway, changing a few tests at a time. |
Ah right, sorry I'm a bit slow this afternoon. I also saw one failure for a missing baseline, but that should be ok too since we haven't been updating the baselines. |
Automated RT Failure Notification |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks like no unexpected failures, and a surprising number of tests passed given the old baseline and the new spack-stack version.
Ha, ya. Should we create new baselines since we've gone this far (and I updated the input for that one test)? |
Machine: hera |
@mkavulich FYI, I moved the newly created baselines and updated bl_date.ncar.conf. |
Identical to ufs-community#2082 (BL change - see below)
Also contains:
ufs-community#2080 (no BL change)
ufs-community#2027 (BL change - see below)
ufs-community#2035 (no BL change)