ctsm5.3.045: Initializing itype as spval for fates patches #2935
Conversation
|
combine this with #2934 ? |
|
@rgknox I suggest you leave this outside of #2934 for now. I'm wondering what will happen with this when the fates and aux_clm test lists are run. I'm curious if you'll see new issues when you run DEBUG level tests with FATES. If so I'm thinking it might be a bit to resolve. But, I might be wrong... |
ekluzek
added
enhancement
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Awesome, to see a start at this so quickly. And for it to already have caught something. Things were being set and then overridden by FATES, so it won't change answers, but it's good to know that the change caught that.
I'm just requesting adding some comments to describe what's going on and why.
samsrabin
modified the milestones:
CESM3 Answer changing freeze,
ctsm6.0.0 (code freeze)
github-project-automation
bot
moved this to Ready to start (or start again)
in CTSM: Upcoming tags
wwieder
moved this from Ready to start (or start again)
to In progress - master/b4b-dev
in CTSM: Upcoming tags
|
@rgknox this looks to me like it could come in right now. As next in line. We plan to have @slevis-lmwg do the integrator step from.. https://github.com/ESCOMP/CTSM/wiki/Protocols-on-updating-FATES-within-CTSM#ctsmfates-developer |
|
That works for me @ekluzek , I believe it is feature complete. I'll work with you and @slevis-lmwg to start testing |
ekluzek
changed the title
glemieux
moved this from Under Review
to Final Testing
in FATES Pull Request Planning and Status
slevis-lmwg
changed the title
samsrabin
added
PR status: awaiting review
ekluzek
removed
the
PR status: awaiting review
Description of changes
On FATES patches, there should be no notion of pft associated with the patch, and therefore patch%itype should always be invalid. Even for FATES-SP, the patch should be associated with the FATES pft, which is not associated with itype. In this set of changes, itype is set to spval on fates patches. This will help prevent bugs in the future, because its use in a fates context should trigger errors, particularly in debug mode.
Specific notes
Addresses part of: #2932
Contributors other than yourself, if any:
@rosiealice @ekluzek @glemieux others
CTSM Issues Fixed (include github issue #):
Fixes: #2933
Are answers expected to change (and if so in what way)? No
Any User Interface Changes (namelist or namelist defaults changes)? No
Does this create a need to change or add documentation? Did you do so? No
Testing performed, if any:
One off tests to see if the model would run with Zeng and Wang turbulent transport. It does. Ran into machine issues testing with Meier2022, which should crash.