UFS-dev PR#122 #118
UFS-dev PR#122 #118
Conversation
* update FD and some nems configs * all except lnd sbs run * update FD and nems.configure * remove temporary test settings * remove history_n settings from one more test
…active (ufs-community#1953) Added new condition turning off samfdeepcnv, when the MYNN shallow convection is active.
…tart (ufs-community#1946) * Convert most global (uncoupled) and regional tests to use quilting restart * use MOM6 test branch, modify mom6_files.cmake * update MOM6 to include 20231106 NOAA-GFDL/rtd_fix * Update cpld_control_p8 remove hera_gnu wall clock stipulation --------- Co-authored-by: jiandewang <jiande.wang@noaa.gov> Co-authored-by: WenMeng-NOAA <wen.meng@noaa.gov>
* update FD and nems.configure * add new suite_FV3_global_nest_v1 to FV3 * new tests for global_nest_v1 suite * update tests to match new gwd scheme * Namelist changes from Mike Toy & adapt to changes from develop in FV3 * Merge FV3 NOAA-EMC/fv3atm#715 from @lisa-bengtsson * remove unused tests/rap_clm_lake * Update bl_date.conf * note that gnv1_nested might work on s4 * Update cpld_control_p8 remove hera_gnu wall clock stipulation
|
Expected failures for ufs-community#1942: rt_001_cpld_control_p8_mixedmode_intel.log:71:Test 001 cpld_control_p8_mixedmode_intel FAIL Tries: 2 |
|
Expected failure for ufs-community#1953 control_p8_mynn_intel |
|
@mkavulich FYI, I kicked off tests for this one. |
|
|
Automated RT Failure Notification |
|
@grantfirl It looks like there's a pretty substantial difference between the expected failures and the actual ones. Are you sure this is the correct list? |
I see that the following tests aren't necessarily the same as the expected ones: I'll investigate these. Since new tests were added, the test numbers are definitely shuffled around. |
|
The gnv* ones are expected due to ufs-community#1941 |
|
It looks like ufs-community#1941 should change the cpld* tests too. It looks like those got missed in the original PR description. |
|
ufs-community#1941 is change rap.nml.in which is used by hrrr_control_gnu. I don't know why other hrrr_control tests wouldn't fail though. |
|
@mkavulich I'm not entirely sure why hrrr_control_gnu changes results. I'm kinda wondering if maybe there was something amiss with a previous PR we merged, e.g. the baseline was corrupted from the last PR or something. Either way, I'm not too concerned about it and I don't want to spend too much more time digging into it. I personally feel comfortable creating new baselines at this point. Do you? |
|
@grantfirl That sounds good to me. I didn't realize the numbering had changed, so I thought we were dealing with a much larger number of differences. I'll kick off the baseline creation. |
|
Automated RT Failure Notification |
Identical to ufs-community#1941
There are two new tests:
gnv1_c96_no_nest_debug - The standard C96 initial conditions used for most physics suites, configured to run global_nest_v1. This is run in debug mode for both compilers
gnv1_nested - Run off of the HAFS global static nest test initial conditions, this tests the suite in a static nest.
Contains