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

First reconciliation PR from production/RRFS.v1 #226

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 18, 2024

Conversation

grantfirl
Copy link
Collaborator

@grantfirl grantfirl commented Oct 3, 2024

Contains the original PR from @haiqinli for the production/RRFS.v1 branch:

#176

on top of the latest ufs/dev branch.

Note that the changes to drag_suite.F90 have been superceded by changes already in ufs/dev.

@@ -4118,7 +4119,7 @@ subroutine cup_output_ens_3d(xff_mid,xf_ens,ierr,dellat,dellaq,dellaqc, &
,intent (inout) :: &
ierr,ierr2,ierr3
integer, intent(in) :: dicycle
real(kind=kind_phys), intent(in), dimension (its:ite) :: xf_dicycle
real(kind=kind_phys), intent(in), dimension (its:ite) :: xf_dicycle, rrfs_factor
!$acc declare copyin(zu,pwd,p_cup,sig,xmbm_in,xmbs_in,edt,xff_mid,dellat,dellaqc,dellaq,pw,ktop,xland1,xf_dicycle)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe irrelevant, but if xf_dicycle is part to the $acc directive, should rrfs_factor be added?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@dustinswales If this caused a problem, do you think that this type of thing would be caught in the SCM nvhpc CI test? Just curious. I.e. is this something that the compiler would catch or would it just be a run-time issue (failure or performance hit)?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have no clue if this would get caught at buildtime/runtime.

@grantfirl grantfirl marked this pull request as ready for review October 7, 2024 17:00
Copy link
Collaborator

@tanyasmirnova tanyasmirnova left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I approve the changes in RUC LSM.

@jkbk2004
Copy link

Tests are done at ufs-community/ufs-weather-model#2449. @rhaesung @dustinswales can you merge this pr?

@dustinswales dustinswales merged commit f3eeb34 into ufs-community:ufs/dev Oct 18, 2024
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants