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

Fast-forward MAM4xx submodule to Add Fixes for Test Failures #6867

Merged

Conversation

mjs271
Copy link

@mjs271 mjs271 commented Dec 21, 2024

This PR fixes the MAM4xx interface for wet scavenging--namely, addressing failing tests and an associated non-determinism issue.

The issues existed primarily on the MAM4xx side of things, so this PR is mostly a fast-forward of the MAM4xx submodule. However, minor edits to the EAMxx interface code were required in order to properly call mam4::wetdep::aero_model_wetdep().

Note:

I'm keeping this a draft for the moment because this is currently pointing to my MAM4xx branch, and I need a review on the MAM4xx PR before I can merge it to main.

@mjs271 mjs271 marked this pull request as draft December 21, 2024 01:49
@bartgol bartgol self-requested a review December 21, 2024 01:54
@bartgol bartgol self-assigned this Dec 21, 2024
@bartgol bartgol added non-BFB PR makes roundoff changes to answers. EAMxx PRs focused on capabilities for EAMxx labels Dec 21, 2024
// HACK: dropmixnuc() requires the parameter enable_aero_vertical_mix,
// so we define it here until we have a better idea of where it
// might come from
const bool enable_aero_vertical_mix = true;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this ALWAYS going to be true? The fact that dropmixnuc has it as an input arg makes me wonder if there are cases we foresee needing this to be false? If it's ALWAYS going to be true, this is fine. If we foresee it being false sometimes, then you could maybe add it as an input to call_function_dropmixnuc, and have the process interface read it from input file (defaulting to true if not found).

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Short answer: for the purposes of EAMxx/E3SM, yes it will always be true.

If I'm paraphrasing correctly (@singhbalwinder), this is a temporary switch to resolve some differences in the mam4xx functionality between what is in e3sm and the parallel development in our forked repo that is meant to simplify and speedup the process of development and review on our side.

fix work array pointers in mam4::wetdep::aero_model_wetdep

update input.yaml for standalone microphys

minor changes to get things running
@mjs271 mjs271 force-pushed the mjs271/mam4xx/ff-submodule branch from f2121c0 to 67f5740 Compare January 9, 2025 16:33
@mjs271 mjs271 marked this pull request as ready for review January 9, 2025 16:34
@bartgol
Copy link
Contributor

bartgol commented Jan 9, 2025

All tests passing except for the expected failures. I'm going to merge and regen baselines. We'll see right away if this fixed things, by looking at other PRs.

@bartgol bartgol merged commit 31452ac into E3SM-Project:master Jan 9, 2025
17 of 32 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
EAGLES EAMxx PRs focused on capabilities for EAMxx non-BFB PR makes roundoff changes to answers.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants