[production/RRFS.v1] Fix 'check all' using 0-sized arrays#2158
Conversation
|
Replaces #2102 and this is targeted at the RRFS release branch. |
|
Retesting on Hera. Will post results when finished. |
|
@jkbk2004 My RTs were successful (no BL changes), but that was comparing against the saved baselines from the develop branch. |
|
Throughput on Hera is slow for our account right now. It looks like it'll be a while. |
Updates list of tests to run for RRFSv1 Adds wcoss2 regression test log
…ll_zero_alloc_RRFS
…b.com/grantfirl/ufs-weather-model into feature/fix_check_all_zero_alloc_RRFS
|
@grantfirl I checked code base of production/rrfs.v1 branch. All looks good. On orion, baseline was reproduced ok. Somehow baseline files look screwed up on hera. I restored baselines and cleaned up to go only with rt.conf_rrfs. @MatthewPyle-NOAA hera/orion/hercules tests are done. This PR will be ready once you confirm on WCOSS2 test |
|
I had a lot of tests fail on WCOSS, which really didn't make sense to me. I'm recreating the baselines somewhat differently than I did the first time (using a -b rt.conf_rrfs option this time) |
You would want |
|
@MatthewPyle-NOAA I checked production/RRFS.v1 code base are ok during the merge process of #2147. So we are ok if you need to re-create baseline on wcoss. Sounds like similar things happened on hera. |
|
@jkbk2004 @MatthewPyle-NOAA @BrianCurtis-NOAA I'm glad that tests are passing on Hera. This saves me from a "wild goose chase" of trying to figure out the failures that I was getting. My next course of action was to produce my own baseline from the top of production/RRFS.v1 and use that, but it sounds like everything is working OK now. |
|
I'm good with it now on WCOSS. |
|
@jkbk2004 Let me know if you need more from me at this stage. I do have a WCOSS log to add eventually. |
@MatthewPyle-NOAA sure! go ahead to push wcoss log. then we can move on to merge/ |
@jkbk2004 Where/how do I push it? I tested with Grant's feature branch, but don't have the permission to push to his space. |
@grantfirl can you add Mathew for the permission to your repo? |
I've added @MatthewPyle-NOAA as a collaborator on my fork, so he should have permission to push now. |
|
Thanks @grantfirl WCOSS log file has been pushed now. |
|
@jkbk2004 @MatthewPyle-NOAA Are we ready to start merging? I can do ccpp-physics and ccpp-framework, but nobody has reviewed NOAA-EMC/GFDL_atmos_cubed_sphere#86. NOAA-GFDL/GFDL_atmos_cubed_sphere#315 was approved, but I opened a new PR when I changed the target and rebased. They both contain the same simple change, so I imagine that the new PR should have implicit approval. |
|
OK, NOAA-EMC/GFDL_atmos_cubed_sphere#86 was approved. I think that we're ready to merge. |
|
@MatthewPyle-NOAA It will be good idea to clean up commit messages when squash/merge. Do you want me to merge this pr? |
|
I can merge it after cleaning up the merge message. |
Commit Queue Requirements:
Description:
This PR at least partially addresses #2023 (at least any runtime errors associated with the CCPP). The strategy is to simply make sure that every variable is allocated, although for variables that had been conditionally-allocated to save memory, they are now being allocated with zero size. This has a ripple effect in other repos where one needs to change from checking whether a variable is allocated to whether the size is > 0.
The change to Intel.cmake was used for testing only and I can remove this if we're not ready to permanently add it.
Commit Message:
Priority:
Git Tracking
UFSWM:
Sub component Pull Requests:
UFSWM Blocking Dependencies:
Changes
Regression Test Changes (Please commit test_changes.list):
Input data Changes:
Library Changes/Upgrades:
Testing Log: