-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
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
Regression test for CLOUDSC2 #230
Conversation
Documentation for this branch can be viewed at https://sites.ecmwf.int/docs/loki/230/index.html |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #230 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 96.03% 95.90% -0.14%
==========================================
Files 197 198 +1
Lines 39019 39093 +74
==========================================
+ Hits 37472 37491 +19
- Misses 1547 1602 +55
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
5dbd1fb
to
1e03830
Compare
beacc40
to
51a4fe1
Compare
51a4fe1
to
271729c
Compare
b0c2109
to
9aa2f6b
Compare
9b1aadb
to
69403ec
Compare
69403ec
to
3c129aa
Compare
f6dc8c3
to
0c024aa
Compare
0c024aa
to
b302f2e
Compare
I have rebased this over #408 to exploit the update to the runner images (and thus compilers), now the weird issues are gone 🎉 Note that the last commit points to a temporary cloudsc2 branch. The commit can be removed once ecmwf-ifs/dwarf-p-cloudsc2-tl-ad#15 has been merged. |
b302f2e
to
7181856
Compare
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 looks fantastic, and is finally passing tests! Really great stuff, GTG from me.
Note, the coverage failure is unavoidable, as regression tests do not trigger coverage tests. I'll override this on merge.
7181856
to
4d87ec6
Compare
This adds a regression test for CLOUDSC2 processing, and enables it as part of the Github actions CI tests.
Temporarily, it points to a branch for CLOUDSC2, which has a pending PR for integration: ecmwf-ifs/dwarf-p-cloudsc2-tl-ad#14
The PR is filed against the new Scheduler branch but doesn't have to be integrated now and can be left dangling for the moment.
Processing works fine and results are correct with GNU on host-side (GPU evaluation is tbd), however, in the Actions runner I'm seeing randomly massive deviations for steps 4 and 6 in the TL variant. No clue what is going on there.