[develop] Added return code to srw_build.sh script. by MichaelLueken · Pull Request #461 · ufs-community/ufs-srweather-app

MichaelLueken · 2022-11-09T19:22:08Z

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:

The Jenkins build test doesn't exit with a return code, so if an executable fails to build, Jenkins will still continue to the test phase, leading to failures in the tests. Exiting with a return code has been added to the .cicd/scripts/srw_build.sh script.

Type of change

Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
This change requires a documentation update

TESTS CONDUCTED:

hera.intel

Tested build manually on Hera using devbuild.sh and srw_build.sh

ISSUE:

Fixes #460

CHECKLIST

My code follows the style guidelines in the Contributor's Guide
I have performed a self-review of my own code using the Code Reviewer's Guide
I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
My changes need updates to the documentation. I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
My changes do not require updates to the documentation (explain).
My changes generate no new warnings
New and existing tests pass with my changes
Any dependent changes have been merged and published

venitahagerty · 2022-11-09T19:37:17Z

Machine: jet
Compiler: intel
Job: build
Repo location: /lfs1/BMC/nrtrr/rrfs_ci/autoci/pr/1116565961/20221109193509/ufs-srweather-app
Build failed
If test failed, please make changes and add the following label back:
ci-jet-intel-build

venitahagerty · 2022-11-09T19:39:08Z

Machine: hera
Compiler: intel
Job: build
Repo location: /scratch1/BMC/zrtrr/rrfs_ci/autoci/pr/1116565961/20221109193515/ufs-srweather-app
Build failed
If test failed, please make changes and add the following label back:
ci-hera-intel-build

MichaelLueken · 2022-11-09T20:05:45Z

The changes properly kill the Jenkins CI pipeline when an executable fails to build during the building phase. Will remove the incorrect component name and resubmit tests.

… again.

venitahagerty · 2022-11-09T20:37:13Z

Machine: jet
Compiler: intel
Job: WE
Repo location: /lfs1/BMC/nrtrr/rrfs_ci/autoci/pr/1116565961/20221109203512/ufs-srweather-app
Build failed
If test failed, please make changes and add the following label back:
ci-jet-intel-WE

venitahagerty · 2022-11-09T20:38:37Z

Machine: hera
Compiler: intel
Job: WE
Repo location: /scratch1/BMC/zrtrr/rrfs_ci/autoci/pr/1116565961/20221109203518/ufs-srweather-app
Build failed
If test failed, please make changes and add the following label back:
ci-hera-intel-WE

… builds.

venitahagerty · 2022-11-09T21:35:46Z

Machine: hera
Compiler: intel
Job: WE
Repo location: /scratch1/BMC/zrtrr/rrfs_ci/autoci/pr/1116565961/20221109212013/ufs-srweather-app
Build was Successful
Rocoto jobs started
Long term tracking will be done on 10 experiments
If test failed, please make changes and add the following label back:
ci-hera-intel-WE
Experiment Succeeded on hera: pregen_grid_orog_sfc_climo
Experiment Succeeded on hera: community_ensemble_2mems_stoch
Experiment Succeeded on hera: grid_RRFS_CONUS_25km_ics_FV3GFS_lbcs_FV3GFS_suite_GFS_2017_gfdlmp_regional
Experiment Succeeded on hera: grid_RRFS_CONUScompact_25km_ics_HRRR_lbcs_RAP_suite_RRFS_v1beta
Experiment Succeeded on hera: grid_RRFS_CONUS_25km_ics_GSMGFS_lbcs_GSMGFS_suite_GFS_v15p2
Experiment Succeeded on hera: grid_RRFS_CONUS_25km_ics_FV3GFS_lbcs_FV3GFS_suite_GFS_v15p2
Experiment Succeeded on hera: grid_RRFS_CONUS_25km_ics_FV3GFS_lbcs_RAP_suite_HRRR
Experiment Succeeded on hera: grid_RRFS_CONUS_25km_ics_FV3GFS_lbcs_FV3GFS_suite_GFS_v16
Experiment Succeeded on hera: grid_RRFS_CONUScompact_25km_ics_HRRR_lbcs_RAP_suite_HRRR
Experiment Succeeded on hera: MET_ensemble_verification
All experiments completed

venitahagerty · 2022-11-09T21:55:31Z

Machine: jet
Compiler: intel
Job: WE
Repo location: /lfs1/BMC/nrtrr/rrfs_ci/autoci/pr/1116565961/20221109212020/ufs-srweather-app
Build was Successful
Rocoto jobs started
Long term tracking will be done on 10 experiments
If test failed, please make changes and add the following label back:
ci-jet-intel-WE
Experiment Succeeded on jet: specify_DT_ATMOS_LAYOUT_XY_BLOCKSIZE
Experiment Succeeded on jet: nco_grid_RRFS_CONUScompact_25km_ics_HRRR_lbcs_RAP_suite_HRRR
Experiment Succeeded on jet: specify_RESTART_INTERVAL
Experiment Succeeded on jet: custom_GFDLgrid
Experiment Succeeded on jet: grid_RRFS_CONUS_25km_ics_FV3GFS_lbcs_FV3GFS_suite_GFS_v15p2
Experiment Succeeded on jet: custom_ESGgrid
Experiment Succeeded on jet: grid_RRFS_CONUS_25km_ics_GSMGFS_lbcs_GSMGFS_suite_GFS_v15p2
Experiment Succeeded on jet: grid_RRFS_CONUS_25km_ics_FV3GFS_lbcs_RAP_suite_HRRR
Experiment Succeeded on jet: specify_DOT_OR_USCORE
Experiment Succeeded on jet: grid_RRFS_CONUS_25km_ics_FV3GFS_lbcs_FV3GFS_suite_GFS_v16
All experiments completed

christinaholtNOAA

This is an interesting concept. I'm not at all opposed, but do have a couple of comments/questions for thought.

I'm curious what mechanism is catching the error. There are some reserved linux exit codes, and I'm curious if this unpredictable exit code might cause any collisions with the standard ones, or even cause problems in properly handling the error.

christopherwharrop-noaa · 2022-11-09T23:26:03Z

Would it be more direct to simply check the status of the build command itself? If ./build.sh isn't returning a meaningful/correct exit code then it should also be fixed. If you want the exit code of this script to be the success/failure of the build, then I'd suggest something like below. Were you planning to make use of the number of FAIL: messages for some other purpose?

# Build and install
cd ${workspace}/tests
export PID=$$
./build.sh ${platform} ${SRW_COMPILER}
build_exit=$?
cd -

# Create combined log file for upload to s3
build_dir="${workspace}/build_${SRW_COMPILER}"
cat ${build_dir}/log.cmake ${build_dir}/log.make \
    >${build_dir}/srw_build-${platform}-${SRW_COMPILER}.log

TEST_OUTPUT="${workspace}/tests/build_test${PID}.out"

exit ${build_exit}

MichaelLueken · 2022-11-10T16:43:18Z

This is an interesting concept. I'm not at all opposed, but do have a couple of comments/questions for thought.

I'm curious what mechanism is catching the error. There are some reserved linux exit codes, and I'm curious if this unpredictable exit code might cause any collisions with the standard ones, or even cause problems in properly handling the error.

@christinaholtNOAA Thank you very much for the review! I have moved the return code handling from .cicd/scripts/srw_build.sh to tests/build.sh. In tests/build.sh, regardless of the number of failed tests, the return code will be 1.

MichaelLueken · 2022-11-10T16:47:07Z

Would it be more direct to simply check the status of the build command itself? If ./build.sh isn't returning a meaningful/correct exit code then it should also be fixed. If you want the exit code of this script to be the success/failure of the build, then I'd suggest something like below. Were you planning to make use of the number of FAIL: messages for some other purpose?
# Build and install
cd ${workspace}/tests
export PID=$$
./build.sh ${platform} ${SRW_COMPILER}
build_exit=$?
cd -

# Create combined log file for upload to s3
build_dir="${workspace}/build_${SRW_COMPILER}"
cat ${build_dir}/log.cmake ${build_dir}/log.make \
    >${build_dir}/srw_build-${platform}-${SRW_COMPILER}.log

TEST_OUTPUT="${workspace}/tests/build_test${PID}.out"

exit ${build_exit}

@christopherwharrop-noaa Thank you very much for your comment! I have removed the unnecessary grep for FAIL: from .cicd/scripts/srw_build.sh (this isn't necessary for anything else) and just read in the return code from tests/build.sh.

danielabdi-noaa

Looks good to me!

venitahagerty · 2022-11-10T17:04:09Z

Machine: hera
Compiler: intel
Job: build
Repo location: /scratch1/BMC/zrtrr/rrfs_ci/autoci/pr/1116565961/20221110165017/ufs-srweather-app
Build was Successful
If test failed, please make changes and add the following label back:
ci-hera-intel-build

venitahagerty · 2022-11-10T17:21:55Z

Machine: jet
Compiler: intel
Job: build
Repo location: /lfs1/BMC/nrtrr/rrfs_ci/autoci/pr/1116565961/20221110165011/ufs-srweather-app
Build was Successful
If test failed, please make changes and add the following label back:
ci-jet-intel-build

[develop] Added return code to srw_build.sh script.

ad90ed8

MichaelLueken added ci-hera-intel-build Kicks off automated build test on hera with intel ci-jet-intel-build Kicks off automated build test on jet with gnu run_we2e_coverage_tests Run the coverage set of SRW end-to-end tests labels Nov 9, 2022

venitahagerty removed ci-jet-intel-build Kicks off automated build test on jet with gnu ci-hera-intel-build Kicks off automated build test on hera with intel labels Nov 9, 2022

Correct issue in sorc/CMakeLists.txt so that the ufs-model will build…

3fa6569

… again.

MichaelLueken added ci-hera-intel-WE Kicks off automated workflow test on hera with intel ci-jet-intel-WE Kicks off automated workflow test on jet with intel labels Nov 9, 2022

venitahagerty removed ci-jet-intel-WE Kicks off automated workflow test on jet with intel ci-hera-intel-WE Kicks off automated workflow test on hera with intel labels Nov 9, 2022

Restore PID functionality in tests/build.sh for GitHub Actions autoci…

6ffb2e9

… builds.

MichaelLueken added ci-hera-intel-WE Kicks off automated workflow test on hera with intel ci-jet-intel-WE Kicks off automated workflow test on jet with intel labels Nov 9, 2022

venitahagerty removed ci-hera-intel-WE Kicks off automated workflow test on hera with intel ci-jet-intel-WE Kicks off automated workflow test on jet with intel labels Nov 9, 2022

MichaelLueken marked this pull request as ready for review November 9, 2022 22:16

MichaelLueken requested review from BenjaminBlake-NOAA, JeffBeck-NOAA, RatkoVasic-NOAA, gsketefian, mkavulich and ywangwof as code owners November 9, 2022 22:16

MichaelLueken requested review from EdwardSnyder-NOAA, chan-hoo, christinaholtNOAA, christopherwharrop-noaa, danielabdi-noaa, dmwright526, gspetro-NOAA, jkbk2004, mark-a-potts, natalie-perlin, panll and willmayfield as code owners November 9, 2022 22:16

christinaholtNOAA approved these changes Nov 9, 2022

View reviewed changes

natalie-perlin approved these changes Nov 10, 2022

View reviewed changes

Add return code to tests/build.sh and read the code in srw_build.sh.

54fd441

MichaelLueken added ci-hera-intel-build Kicks off automated build test on hera with intel ci-jet-intel-build Kicks off automated build test on jet with gnu labels Nov 10, 2022

venitahagerty removed ci-jet-intel-build Kicks off automated build test on jet with gnu ci-hera-intel-build Kicks off automated build test on hera with intel labels Nov 10, 2022

danielabdi-noaa approved these changes Nov 10, 2022

View reviewed changes

MichaelLueken merged commit 0ba66f9 into ufs-community:develop Nov 10, 2022

MichaelLueken deleted the bugfix/add-returncode-to-srw_build branch November 10, 2022 17:30

Conversation

MichaelLueken commented Nov 9, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:

Type of change

TESTS CONDUCTED:

ISSUE:

CHECKLIST

Uh oh!

venitahagerty commented Nov 9, 2022

Uh oh!

venitahagerty commented Nov 9, 2022

Uh oh!

MichaelLueken commented Nov 9, 2022

Uh oh!

venitahagerty commented Nov 9, 2022

Uh oh!

venitahagerty commented Nov 9, 2022

Uh oh!

venitahagerty commented Nov 9, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

venitahagerty commented Nov 9, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

christinaholtNOAA left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

christopherwharrop-noaa commented Nov 9, 2022

Uh oh!

MichaelLueken commented Nov 10, 2022

Uh oh!

MichaelLueken commented Nov 10, 2022

Uh oh!

danielabdi-noaa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

venitahagerty commented Nov 10, 2022

Uh oh!

venitahagerty commented Nov 10, 2022

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

MichaelLueken commented Nov 9, 2022 •

edited

Loading

venitahagerty commented Nov 9, 2022 •

edited

Loading

venitahagerty commented Nov 9, 2022 •

edited

Loading