Skip to content
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

Eliminated additional data movement in RRTMGP #25

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 1, 2024

Conversation

johnmauff
Copy link

This is a follow-up for PR #24. It reduces additional data movement in the rte_sw() and rte_lw() subroutines. It also eliminates data movement within the calls to gas_optics() by moving the data movement outside of the subroutine call tree.

@gdicker1 gdicker1 self-assigned this Aug 1, 2024
@gdicker1 gdicker1 added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 1, 2024
Copy link

@gdicker1 gdicker1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @johnmauff this looks good.

Would you mind if I also add an update to the Externals_CAM.cfg to bring in the EWOrg/rte-rrtmgp #1 changes?

@johnmauff
Copy link
Author

johnmauff commented Aug 1, 2024 via email

johnmauff and others added 2 commits August 1, 2024 13:54
These changes include removing a (now unneeded) temp variable and some
unnecessary OpenACC copyout directives.
@gdicker1 gdicker1 force-pushed the rrtmgp_data_opt_phase1b_ew branch from 5b267b8 to 044002f Compare August 1, 2024 19:55
@gdicker1 gdicker1 changed the title Eliminated addiitonal data movement in RRTMGP Eliminated additional data movement in RRTMGP Aug 1, 2024
@gdicker1
Copy link

gdicker1 commented Aug 1, 2024

Force push 5b267b8 to 044002f because I couldn't leave a commit message typo alone. Otherwise, only change made was to update Externals_CAM.cfg

Copy link

@gdicker1 gdicker1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These changes look good to me now. I plan to merge this in about an hour

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants