Skip to content

Conversation

@koldunovn
Copy link
Member

That's a relatively big one, but should not be too compicated. It mostly adding the interfaces, that Intel compiler was complaining about, and did not let me compile with debug flags.

This PR depends on #664 - as for icebergs I need to do more than just adding interfaces and don't want to break anything for @ackerlar

Would be also great if things work for recom as well (@ogurses )

@koldunovn koldunovn changed the title Add a bunch of interfaces to make intel happy [WIP] Add a bunch of interfaces to make intel happy Jan 12, 2025
@ackerlar
Copy link
Collaborator

@koldunovn I checked the changes made in #664 and it runs fine with interactive icebergs

@koldunovn
Copy link
Member Author

@koldunovn I checked the changes made in #664 and it runs fine with interactive icebergs

Thanks a lot!

@ackerlar
Copy link
Collaborator

I get this error:

'''
6219 681: --> subroutine vert_vel_ale --> found Nan in Wvel after cumulativ summation(...)
6220 681: mype = 105
6221 681: node = 1
6222 681: Wvel(nzmin:nzmax, n)= NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
NaN
'''

and the model crashes: '/work/ab0246/a270124/esm-experiments/awiesm-2.6/test03/log/test03_awiesm_compute_13500101-13501231_14756612.log'

@patrickscholz
Copy link
Contributor

Does this happen in the first step of the model? Since it happen after the cumulativ sumation of Wvel means that your UV from which you compute the divergences already have some NaN. This could mean that there are already issues with computing your deta and eta --> which could link to the water_flux. Any idea how the water_flux looks like ?

@ackerlar
Copy link
Collaborator

Yes, it happens in the first time step. Is there any way to check water_flux after the crash? I run AWI-ESM (i.e. with ECHAM) and icebergs + cavities. The same setup I used for testing #664 which worked fine for me

@patrickscholz
Copy link
Contributor

In optimal case it should have created a blowup file fesom.blowup.nc ...

@ackerlar
Copy link
Collaborator

There is no blowup file

@patrickscholz
Copy link
Contributor

You have to check where the model exactly quits because the message you posted is just a warning the model doesnt stop there. If the model comes to the point at the end of the ocean step where it checks for the blowups and finds it. It should be able to write a blowupfile where the most important variables at the moment of blowup are in.

@koldunovn
Copy link
Member Author

Please don't check this at the moment - I totally broke something :)

@JanStreffing JanStreffing added this to the FESOM 2.7 milestone Aug 19, 2025
@JanStreffing JanStreffing linked an issue Sep 2, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
@JanStreffing
Copy link
Collaborator

JanStreffing commented Oct 10, 2025

Please don't check this at the moment - I totally broke something :)

Did @suvarchal redo this with #736? Is this still needed? @koldunovn

@koldunovn
Copy link
Member Author

Can close and remove.

@koldunovn koldunovn closed this Oct 10, 2025
@koldunovn koldunovn deleted the make_intel_happy branch October 10, 2025 15:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants