-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 315
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
Update submodule tags to pass runoff from CISM to ROF as per issue #2590 #2605
Conversation
From the TODO list in the issue UPDATE: Trying aux_clm on izumi |
Bisecting between my passing and failing aux_clm test-suites:
|
aux_clm on izumi now OK on derecho
In the first of these two, the largest NORMALIZED DIFF is ctsm_sci tests_0703-123641de
In the last of these, I see larger diffs including in variables that I would not have expected initially. This is the only Bgc case here. Should I expect changes in CH4 variables as a result of the changes in river flow @swensosc?
|
@swensosc verified by email that these diffs seem reasonable. Sean wrote: |
Merging ctsm5.2.014
testing on derecho
I will rerun aux_clm on derecho and izumi to be safe. |
@jedwards4b I updated to ctsm5.2.014 and submitted tests as posted above. If all goes smoothly, I should merge this PR next. First I wanted your input on something that seems concerning to me about ccs_config:
and then status returns...
and git describe returns... |
@jedwards4b |
ERS_D.f19_g17.I1850Clm50BgcCrop.izumi_nag.clm-ciso_monthly_matrixcn_spinup failed during the build because a namelist variable needed renaming
Thank you @jedwards4b aux_clm results |
These differences seem out of the ordinary:
@glemieux are these new tests that came with your recent PR? Does this concern you? |
@slevis-lmwg can you point me to the test folder? I'd like to check out the |
@glemieux please look here |
There is a permissions problem for your baseline directory. |
@jedwards4b I updated permissions for that one and will go through and update for my other ones, too. LMK if you still have trouble accessing. |
Thank you for fixing that - the values for the field FATES_TRANSITION_MATRIX_LULU in both the baseline and the case look like garbage to me. Can someone confirm these values are expected? |
@glemieux is taking a look. |
Yep, those cases are definitely garbage, but they've been that way for these two test since that variable was introduced in I'd say this is ok as is to go forward, but an issue should be created to fix this as it will likely flag as a DIFF again in the future given the randomness of the garbage. @slevis-lmwg and @jedwards4b how does that sound to y'all? |
I'm fine with that. I can open the issue and you can add to it as you see fit @glemieux |
Description of changes
Details in #2590
Specific notes
Contributors other than yourself, if any:
@ekluzek @mvertens @jedwards4b @billsacks @Katetc
CTSM Issues Fixed (include github issue #):
Fixes #2590
Are answers expected to change (and if so in what way)?
Yes, due to change in default behavior
Any User Interface Changes (namelist or namelist defaults changes)?
Default behavior has changed as explained in #2590
Does this create a need to change or add documentation? Did you do so?
Probably, but I did not.