-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 118
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
ufs-release/public-v2: bit-for-bit reproducibility for regional runs when changing MPI decomposition #68
Merged
bensonr
merged 4 commits into
NOAA-GFDL:ufs-release/public-v2
from
climbfuji:regional_decomp_b4b
Feb 9, 2021
Merged
ufs-release/public-v2: bit-for-bit reproducibility for regional runs when changing MPI decomposition #68
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
489244d
Add missing call to mpp_update_domain for q in model/fv_tracer2d.F90
climbfuji 02b1b32
Remove two unused variables from model/sw_core.F90
climbfuji bfcc54c
Add missing and update calls to update domain and halos, fix compiler…
climbfuji f3f318f
Merge branch 'ufs-release/public-v2' of https://github.com/NOAA-GFDL/…
climbfuji File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is OK but could likely be avoided by having the regional boundary update fill boundary rows that lie in the haloes too: ie. if this is a west edge, then have the BCs fill in (-2:0) x (jsd:jed) instead of just (-2:0) x (jsc:jec).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the nesting code already does this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@lharris4 Can you explain please what you mean? I tried to skip this one update call, and the results were different. I did that with every single change in this PR, actually. Took them out on by one but left the others and reran the tests. Every time they failed, thus I think that all of them are required (unless changes are made to the regional BC update code as you mentioned).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Got it, thank you. Do you think it is ok to get the changes into the public release code as they are now, or should we try to follow your suggestion. The reason I am asking is that the SRW App is on a tight release schedule. The code freeze was last week and we were hoping to get the b4b issues fixed and merged as an "emergency bugfix".
We should definitely follow your suggestions for the authoritative/development branches and not try to bring over the public release code changes. Doing so would probably allow us to remove several of the already existing calls to
mpp_update_domain
, if I understand this correctly, but it will require a bit of time for the development to happen.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@lharris4 @bensonr I would like to follow up with this issue, do we have the boundary fill updates in the master and dev/emc branch? We still have decomposition reproducibility issue with regional test and would like to see if we can try the fix you mentioned.