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

rpointer fix for cesm #990

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 5, 2024
Merged

Conversation

jedwards4b
Copy link
Contributor

@jedwards4b jedwards4b commented Oct 30, 2024

For detailed information about submitting Pull Requests (PRs) to the CICE-Consortium,
please refer to: https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/About-Us/wiki/Resource-Index#information-for-developers

PR checklist

  • Short (1 sentence) summary of your PR:
    add status feature to open existing file, remove no longer needed cesm pointer_file modification

  • Developer(s):
    Jim Edwards (NCAR)

  • Suggest PR reviewers from list in the column to the right.
    Dave Bailey

  • Please copy the PR test results link or provide a summary of testing completed below.

  • How much do the PR code changes differ from the unmodified code?

    • bit for bit
    • different at roundoff level
    • more substantial
  • Does this PR create or have dependencies on Icepack or any other models?

    • Yes
    • No
  • Does this PR update the Icepack submodule? If so, the Icepack submodule must point to a hash on Icepack's main branch.

    • Yes
    • No
  • Does this PR add any new test cases?

    • Yes
    • No
  • Is the documentation being updated? ("Documentation" includes information on the wiki or in the .rst files from doc/source/, which are used to create the online technical docs at https://readthedocs.org/projects/cice-consortium-cice/. A test build of the technical docs will be performed as part of the PR testing.)

    • Yes
    • No, does the documentation need to be updated at a later time?
      • Yes
      • No
  • Please document the changes in detail, including why the changes are made. This will become part of the PR commit log.
    With the change in cesm3_cice6_5_0_9 the correct cesm pointer_file name is written to the namelist file and so it is no longer required to append the instance number in a multi instance case.

@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ subroutine init_restart_read(ice_ic)
filename = trim(ice_ic)
else
if (my_task == master_task) then
open(nu_rst_pointer,file=pointer_file)
open(nu_rst_pointer,file=pointer_file, status='old')
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We could / should probably do error checking on this open ? @apcraig ?

Anyway - its unrelated to this change

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's exactly why I added the status="old", the fortran error message provided if the file doesn't exist should be adequate.

Copy link
Contributor

@apcraig apcraig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please check that io_netcdf is consistent with io_pio with respect to recent changes in rpointer implementation.

@dabail10
Copy link
Contributor

I believe everything here is in CESMCOUPLED ifdefs and so should not be added to io_netcdf or io_pio.

@anton-seaice
Copy link
Contributor

Oh yes -

open(nu_rst_pointer,file=pointer_file)
should be update to match with status='old'

@apcraig apcraig merged commit d619592 into CICE-Consortium:main Nov 5, 2024
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants