[RegCNET] regarding this bug fix

Mon May 14 14:15:07 CEST 2012

Dear Guiling Wang,
Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. Our thread of communications as following (I ignored some communications between Chao Sun and me):
1) First, I posted my question after many time trying to compile the model but it was not successful:
https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/2012/006045.html
2) After that Cheng posted his instruction to fix:
https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/2012/006083.html
3) I posted another question:
https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/2012/006087.html
4) Guangshan Cheng posted his instruction again:
https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/2012/006093.html
5) Chao Sun posted:
https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/2012/006102.html
6) GuangshanCheng posted:
https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/2012/006107.html
7) I posted:
https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/2012/006108.html
8) And, the last one, Guangshan Cheng answered me:

This fixing is not to fix the problem of missing values or zero in SRF and SST.

Some variables in SRF, you can find them in clmoutput.clm2.h0*.nc, such as TSA (2 meters temperature).

I think it will take time to find the reason.

Sorry, I do not have clue now.

Guangshan
---------------------------
Hopefully, ICTP's model developers can fix these problems.
Best wishes.
PVT

--- On Sun, 5/13/12, Wang, Guiling <gwang at engr.uconn.edu> wrote:

From: Wang, Guiling <gwang at engr.uconn.edu>
Subject: regarding this bug fix
To: "Phan Van Tan" <tanpv2000 at yahoo.com>, "guangshan chen" <gchen9 at gmail.com>
Cc: "chao sun" <1988sunchao at gmail.com>, "giorgi" <giorgi at ictp.it>
Date: Sunday, May 13, 2012, 7:36 PM

Dear Guangshan, Chao, and Phan Van Tan, 

I have followed this thread of communications with interest. However, at this point, I think it would be more efficient if one of you can summarize and clearly
 describe the problem to the ICTP contacts so that they can look into this more carefully. That way, they can come up with a fix and test it before releasing it to the RegCNET community. (After reading your recent email exchanges, it is no longer clear to me
 what works and work does not.) 

Filippo, maybe you can  suggest a best contact person to report this. The problem several group projects had on Friday at the workshop was related to this –
 apparently the fix Guangshan suggested was incorporated into the version used at the workshop at the last minute, and it was causing strange problems and we had to reverse it back. 

Thanks! 
Guiling 

***************************************** 
Guiling Wang, Ph.D. 
Director of Environmental Engineering Program 
Associate Professor in Civil & Environmental Engineering

University of Connecticut 
Storrs, CT 06269-2037 
Tel:  (860) 486-5648; Fax: (860) 486-2298 
Email: gwang at engr.uconn.edu

http://www.engr.uconn.edu/~gwang 

From: regcnet-bounces at lists.ictp.it [mailto:regcnet-bounces at lists.ictp.it]
On Behalf Of Phan Van Tan

Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 12:47 AM

To: guangshan chen

Cc: regcnet at lists.ictp.it; chao sun

Subject: Re: [RegCNET] Another Bug confirmed and fixed in RegCM4.2 with CLM option 

Dear Guangshan Chen and Chao Sun,

Many thanks for your comments. Hopefully someone can solve it before us.

Have a nice weekend days.

--- On Sat, 5/12/12, guangshan chen <gchen9 at gmail.com> wrote: 

From: guangshan chen <gchen9 at gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Another Bug confirmed and fixed in RegCM4.2 with CLM option

To: "Phan Van Tan" <tanpv2000 at yahoo.com>

Cc: regcnet at lists.ictp.it, "chao sun" <1988sunchao at gmail.com>

Date: Saturday, May 12, 2012, 8:36 PM 

Dear Phan Van Tan, 

This fixing is not to fix the problem of missing values or zero in SRF and SST. 

Some variables in SRF, you can find them in clmoutput.clm2.h0*.nc, such as TSA (2 meters temperature). 

I think it will take time to find the reason. 

Sorry, I do not have clue now. 

Guangshan 

On May 12, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Phan Van Tan wrote: 

Dear Guangshan Chen,

After fixing, the model output in the SRF and STS files are still missing values or zero !!!???

--- On Fri, 5/11/12, Guangshan Chen <gchen9 at gmail.com> wrote: 

From: Guangshan Chen <gchen9 at gmail.com>

Subject: Another Bug confirmed and fixed in RegCM4.2 with CLM option

To: regcnet at lists.ictp.it

Cc: "Phan Van Tan" <tanpv2000 at yahoo.com>, "chao sun" <1988sunchao at gmail.com>

Date: Friday, May 11, 2012, 8:48 AM 

Dear all, 

There is another bug confirmed and fixed in RegCM4.2 with CLM option. 

First, thanks for Chao Sun who found it and Phan Van Tan who provided part of fixing. 

This bug is in ./Main/clmlib/clm_atmlnd.F90, line 1370 and line 1374. 

I have confirmed that line 1370 and line 1374 do cause a segment fault due to reallocation of c2r_allout by each processor. 

(if you use one processor, it is no problem. Also you may can not find it by just run the model for couple of days. I find it after 

about one month. At first, I just tested the code for couple of days and did not find it.) After fixing it, the model passed the crashed point. 

It is still running now (two months already). 

The lines 1370 and 1374 should be fixed as follow:

     if(AERTYP.ne.'AER00D0') then  !Aerosol scheme on

       nout = 22

       allocate(c2r_all(nt*nout))

       if (.NOT. allocated(c2r_allout(numg*nout))) allocate(c2r_allout(numg*nout))

     else

       nout = 20

       allocate(c2r_all(nt*nout))

       if (.NOT. allocated(c2r_allout(numg*nout))) allocate(c2r_allout(numg*nout))

     end if 

I made a new patch file based on the old one in ./Main/clmlib/patchset. You can use this new patch to replace the old one. 

Next step, comment deallocate(c2r_allout) (delete this line) in ./Main/clmlib/mod_mtrxclm.F90. 

I had made a patch file for mod_mtrxclm.F90. The attached is a new one. 

Guangshan Chen 

University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/attachments/20120514/9ddb05f4/attachment.html>