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

Update CTM to be in line with GEOSgcm 10.21.0 (and a bit more) #42

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mathomp4
Copy link
Member

This PR updates the CTM to be inline with GEOSgcm 10.21.0. Actually a little more than GEOSgcm 10.21.0. There have been some changes to GEOSgcm main and GEOSgcm_App that are to better support working at NAS. As these changes were (trivially) zero-diff, I decided to add them in this PR rather than wait for the next stable version of GEOSgcm (which will be next year).


Note 1

I know that #41 exists. But I didn't want to "overwrite" that in case @mmanyin or @JulesKouatchou were currently testing it. This PR is sort of built on #41 so if #41 goes in first, this PR should get "smaller" as we merge in all the changes already in #41.

Note 2

I am not sure how to label this. GEOSgcm 10.21.0 is non-zero-diff to GEOSgcm v10.19.5, but I'm not sure if any of that non-zero-diff-ness spreads to GEOSctm. Much of the NZD was in GEOSgcm_GridComp, so that doesn't matter.

This does, however, update GEOSchem_GridComp to v1.7.0 which was NZD to the GCM.

It also updates ESMA_env and ESMA_cmake to change compiler to Intel 2021.3 and default Intel compiler flags to better generalize GEOS (makes things easier at NAS). These two changes were NZD to the GEOSgcm, but weirdly zero-diff to the GEOSldas. So...not sure what will happen here.

I'm guessing...non-zero-diff???

@mathomp4 mathomp4 added 0 diff The changes in this pull request have verified to be zero-diff with the target branch. Non 0-diff The changes in this pull request are non-zero-diff labels Dec 23, 2021
@mathomp4 mathomp4 self-assigned this Dec 23, 2021
@mathomp4 mathomp4 requested review from a team as code owners December 23, 2021 13:57
@mathomp4 mathomp4 added the Contingent - DNA Do Not Approve (DNA). These changes are contingent on other PRs label Dec 23, 2021
@mathomp4
Copy link
Member Author

Blocking this as the build tests seem to have failed...

@mathomp4 mathomp4 marked this pull request as draft December 23, 2021 14:23
@mathomp4
Copy link
Member Author

Also converting to draft so it can't be merged.

@mathomp4 mathomp4 removed the Contingent - DNA Do Not Approve (DNA). These changes are contingent on other PRs label Dec 23, 2021
@mathomp4
Copy link
Member Author

Ohh. I think I know the answer to this. I might need to wait until @bena-nasa is back from holiday break. I'll make my best attempt to figure out the issue, but I think I'll need to edit some new(-ish) code of his in FV3.

@mmanyin
Copy link
Contributor

mmanyin commented Dec 23, 2021

@mathomp4 Thanks for helping CTM keep up with GCM. There are a few PR's currently in the queue that I would like to approve before advancing version numbers. Hopefully by the time this (#42 ) is ready to go, the other PR's will be finished.

@mathomp4
Copy link
Member Author

@mathomp4 Thanks for helping CTM keep up with GCM. There are a few PR's currently in the queue that I would like to approve before advancing version numbers. Hopefully by the time this (#42 ) is ready to go, the other PR's will be finished.

@mmanyin Okay. I mainly made the PR so I didn't forget anything myself. I'll probably just use this one as the omnibus PR for various non-CTM updates (MAPL, etc.)

@mathomp4
Copy link
Member Author

mathomp4 commented Jan 4, 2022

Okay. This has fixes from @bena-nasa in MAPL 2.15.0 and FV3 GC 1.6.0 that should let GEOSctm build!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
0 diff The changes in this pull request have verified to be zero-diff with the target branch. Non 0-diff The changes in this pull request are non-zero-diff
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants