updates to nuopc cap #30
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to add a nuopc test to the mosart testlist.
This is the test I think we should add...
diff --git a/cime_config/testdefs/testlist_mosart.xml b/cime_config/testdefs/testlist_mosart.xml
index b9c46f1..84a9bbf 100644
--- a/cime_config/testdefs/testlist_mosart.xml
+++ b/cime_config/testdefs/testlist_mosart.xml
@@ -50,6 +50,15 @@
<option name="comment" >Smoke test with DEBUG on all machines/compilers</option>
</options>
</test>
+ <test name="SMS_D_Ld5_Vnuopc" grid="f10_f10_musgs" compset="I1850Clm50Bgc" testmods="mosart/default">
+ <machines>
+ <machine name="cheyenne" compiler="intel" category="mosart"></machine>
+ </machines>
+ <options>
+ <option name="wallclock">00:20:00</option>
+ <option name="comment" >Smoke test with DEBUG and NUOPC driver</option>
+ </options>
+ </test>
<test name="SMS_D" grid="f10_f10_musgs" compset="I1850Clm50Bgc" testmods="mosart/decompOpts">
<machines>
<machine name="cheyenne" compiler="intel" category="mosart"></machine>
|
@ekluzek - I have added the changes you requested and pushed back to github. Can this PR move ahead? |
|
Yes. Did you run the one nuopc test or should I do that? |
|
@ekluzek - I am getting the same error with the correct tags. I will track this down. Thanks for doing this test. |
|
@ekluzek - I am getting the same error using the older code base. It seems to be dying in a pio call. |
|
@jedwards4b, @billsacks, @ekluzek - Backing up to pio1 fixed the problem - and the test ran successfully. |
|
@mvertens Can we open a new issue regarding the failing test? SMS_D.f09_g17.I2000Clm50SpGs.cheyenne_intel (with mct and nuopc and pio2) |
|
@jedwards4b - this is a CTSM issue - not a MOSART issue. So this needs to
go into the CTSM issues and I believe is a "critical issue". I will open it
and assign it to you.
…On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 6:45 AM jedwards4b ***@***.***> wrote:
@mvertens <https://github.com/mvertens> Can we open a new issue regarding
the failing test? SMS_D.f09_g17.I2000Clm50SpGs.cheyenne_intel (with mct and
nuopc and pio2)
Can you tell if this a mosart issue or a CTSM one?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#30 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB4XCE5AS7GOKG6EC67BKEDRHDKPPANCNFSM4LFX2K2Q>
.
|
|
@jedwards4b - I see you just pushed an additional fix to this branch. I'm going to start testing soon on this branch along with the corresponding nuopc_cap branches for rtm and ctsm. Do you plan to make any more changes to any of these branches? |
|
@billsacks I don't anticipate any further changes at this time. Thanks! |
The given test used CISM rather than SGLC, and failed (at least using the externals present in CTSM: CISM master doesn't have a nuopc cap). This new test is similar to the one we're adding in the aux_clm test list.
Updates to NUOPC cap Main purpose is updates to NUOPC cap. Also a fix for PIO2. Most changes are from Mariana Vertenstein, brought to master by Bill Sacks. These changes are documented in #30 Testing: mosart test suite (cheyenne & izumi), in the context of a CTSM checkout (ESCOMP/CTSM#939). Baseline comparisons done against ctsm1.0.dev085.
Updates to NUOPC cap Main purpose is updates to NUOPC cap. Also a fix for PIO2. Most changes are from Mariana Vertenstein, brought to master by Bill Sacks. These changes are documented in ESCOMP#30 Testing: mosart test suite (cheyenne & izumi), in the context of a CTSM checkout (ESCOMP/CTSM#939). Baseline comparisons done against ctsm1.0.dev085.
This PR only effects the NUOPC cap and brings in updates that accompany CMEPS updates.