Feature/mfmehari/krok obio

[mfmehari]

OBIO (NOBM) is integrated into the Krok Model.
It is still in testing phase.
It is a zero diff PR.

[sanAkel]

Thanks @mfmehari I'll take a look at this tomorrow (late in the day).

Can you list all the ways you tested this PR. Example coupled ( which ocean, what resolution(s)), also you must do an uncoupled model run - it should preserve answers in both (uncoupled and coupled) modes- this is needed because you have changed source code at a lot of places.

[tclune]

cmake changes ok

[mfmehari]

Thanks @mfmehari I'll take a look at this tomorrow (late in the day).

Can you list all the ways you tested this PR. Example coupled ( which ocean, what resolution(s)), also you must do an uncoupled model run - it should preserve answers in both (uncoupled and coupled) modes- this is needed because you have changed source code at a lot of places.

@sanAkel
It is tested with the coupled model run:
AGCM: C12 (IM:12 x JM:72) and LM:72
OGCM (MOM6): IM:72 x JM:36 and LM:50
Okay, I will do the uncoupled run.
Thank you!

[mfmehari]

Thanks @mfmehari I'll take a look at this tomorrow (late in the day).
Can you list all the ways you tested this PR. Example coupled ( which ocean, what resolution(s)), also you must do an uncoupled model run - it should preserve answers in both (uncoupled and coupled) modes- this is needed because you have changed source code at a lot of places.

@sanAkel It is tested with the coupled model run: AGCM: C12 (IM:12 x JM:72) and LM:72 OGCM (MOM6): IM:72 x JM:36 and LM:50 Okay, I will do the uncoupled run. Thank you!

[mfmehari]

Thanks @mfmehari I'll take a look at this tomorrow (late in the day).
Can you list all the ways you tested this PR. Example coupled ( which ocean, what resolution(s)), also you must do an uncoupled model run - it should preserve answers in both (uncoupled and coupled) modes- this is needed because you have changed source code at a lot of places.

@sanAkel It is tested with the coupled model run: AGCM: C12 (IM:12 x JM:72) and LM:72 OGCM (MOM6): IM:72 x JM:36 and LM:50 Okay, I will do the uncoupled run. Thank you!

@sanAkel Hi Santha,
Tested the uncoupled run and it has a zero diff.
AGCM: C12 (im:12 x JM:72) and LM:72
Data_Ocean Horizontal Resolution code: o1 (1 -deg, 360x180 Reynolds)
Thank you!

[gmao-rreichle]

Changes ok from Land perspective. Would appreciate a more descriptive PR title.

[sanAkel]

@mfmehari Please consider making suggested changes.

[mathomp4]

@mfmehari Please consider making suggested changes.

@sanAkel I guess the only issue is that the rest of the DO_ resources in the gridcomp around there do not use logicals.

    call MAPL_GetResource ( MAPL, DO_OBIO, Label="USE_OCEANOBIOGEOCHEM:", DEFAULT=0, _RC)
    call MAPL_GetResource ( MAPL, DO_DATASEA, Label="USE_DATASEA:", DEFAULT=1, _RC)
    call MAPL_GetResource ( MAPL, DO_WAVES, Label="USE_WAVES:", DEFAULT=0, _RC)
    call MAPL_GetResource ( MAPL, DO_SEA_SPRAY, Label="USE_SEA_SPRAY:", DEFAULT=0, _RC)

I mean, it's what they should do but... I guess the question is should we be consistent?

[sanAkel]

@mfmehari Please consider making suggested changes.

@sanAkel I guess the only issue is that the rest of the DO_ resources in the gridcomp around there do not use logicals.

    call MAPL_GetResource ( MAPL, DO_OBIO, Label="USE_OCEANOBIOGEOCHEM:", DEFAULT=0, _RC)
    call MAPL_GetResource ( MAPL, DO_DATASEA, Label="USE_DATASEA:", DEFAULT=1, _RC)
    call MAPL_GetResource ( MAPL, DO_WAVES, Label="USE_WAVES:", DEFAULT=0, _RC)
    call MAPL_GetResource ( MAPL, DO_SEA_SPRAY, Label="USE_SEA_SPRAY:", DEFAULT=0, _RC)

I mean, it's what they should do but... I guess the question is should we be consistent?

@mathomp4 (and @mfmehari), your ⬆️ question is a relevant one. Following are my current thoughts.

1. This PR is to a repo that has decades of (...) built in. There is absolutely no way we can accomplish should we be consistent? unless one of us spends some time to clean this (logical) aspect and indeed so many, many, ... others; ultimately we'll be looking at a rewrite! (Just look at surface GC .F90, look at its length and scope? Anyway let's leave it out here).
2. My suggestions to @mfmehari are to the point of what they _should_ do so things are better going forward. I had the same comments earlier for the waves_PR from @adarmenov and others before it; I'm being consistent in my suggestions.

@mathomp4 did I answer your question(s)?

[mfmehari]

@sanAkel If we are okay with DO_DATA_ATM4OCN only being in logical form, I could go ahead change its type, thank you!

[sanAkel]

@sanAkel If we are okay with DO_DATA_ATM4OCN only being in logical form, I could go ahead change its type, thank you!

👍 Let's just try to do good here on ...

[mfmehari]

@sanAkel The type of DO_DATA_ATM4OCN has been changed from int to logical.

[mfmehari]

Thank you all! @sdrabenh @mathomp4 @sanAkel @tclune @bena-nasa @lcandre2 @gmao-rreichle