Skip to content

b4b: Move the changes to initialize the task decomposition from mpi_scan to main development#3666

Draft
ekluzek wants to merge 67 commits intoESCOMP:b4b-devfrom
ekluzek:decomp_mpi_scan_move_to_b4b
Draft

b4b: Move the changes to initialize the task decomposition from mpi_scan to main development#3666
ekluzek wants to merge 67 commits intoESCOMP:b4b-devfrom
ekluzek:decomp_mpi_scan_move_to_b4b

Conversation

@ekluzek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ekluzek ekluzek commented Dec 16, 2025

Description of changes

This moves the core code changes to initialize the processor decomposition from the mpi_scan branch in #3469 to b4b-dev. This removes some of the changes for memory checking and additional self testing as well as some of the additional timers that don't look useful now.

I created two previous branches before I created the process in #3665 where I worked out the details to NOT make this have too many commits and be hard to do. I also figured out how to remove merge commits as they need special handling, and usually aren't wanted in a case like this. Another way to do this would be to do this outside of git, which might have been similar length as the final version, but could've missed some important changes.

Specific notes

Contributors other than yourself, if any: John Dennis

CTSM Issues Fixed (include github issue #):
Fixes #3370
Fixes #3368
Fixes #3672
Some work on #3448
Some work on #3476

Are answers expected to change (and if so in what way)? No (the determination of the decomposition is identical as well)

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 No

Testing performed, if any: Will run standard testing
The mpi_scan testing branch has had all the test lists run for it: aux_clm, ctsm_sci, decomp_init, decomp_init_uhr, and fates

 Conflicts:
	src/cpl/share_esmf/lnd_set_decomp_and_domain.F90
…e destroyed so remove the destroy for the distgrid, and the two meshes, this runs but doesn't seem to lower memory
…e about leaving the distgrid around, and also delete the meshes as it seems to work with this in place
 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
 Conflicts:
	src/cpl/share_esmf/lnd_set_decomp_and_domain.F90
…ted error messaging

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…he subname, create new internal subroutines in decompInit_lnd for allocate, clean, and check errors, move the check errors part to the first thing done

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…array sizes are set before allocates, initialize some decompMod values to invalid for error checking, add error checking to get_proc_bounds/get_proc_clumps, seperate out allocate for gindex to own allocate method, as it has be be done later after decomp is done, these are all improvements in ESCOMP#3448

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
… add error handling of nsegspc, don't check endCohort in get_proc_bounds and get_clump_bounds as doesn't seem to be set

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…etup/clean for each DecompInit test, move the decomp_mod_clean to decompMod and use it for the decompInit tests

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
	src/self_tests/TestDecompInit.F90 --- removed
…re to the regular operation

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…mpi-serial

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…sor_type structure, and start adding a couple methods to help get them set
…for mpiscan and verify it, allocate the new procinfo gi and gj indices, make sure they are set, compiles but fails at run

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…the call expects all subgrid levels to be set
…ocate for the local task, this works for the serial case

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
… clump_pproc for the setting of ggidx

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…moved for the final version

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…s for serial mode

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…global clumps

 Conflicts:
	src/self_tests/TestDecompInit.F90
… the log that aren't needed anymore

 Conflicts:
	src/main/decompInitMod.F90
…f there is also an endrun in the it, so calc_globalxy_indices will need to be changed to a pure function that returns values that can be checked at the call level
… remove pure from the calc_ routines in decompMod, and write out information, the unit test does work now
…r returns as nglob_x/nglob_y should be set before used
…en't covered in the more public calc_globalxy_indices
…in each test, and add some tests that notes suggested
…e set_decomp_info subroutine and make it public for unit testing, this doesn't work as it fails in clm_ptrs_compdown, and the endrun has as a bad index of -9999 is given to LONDEG
@ekluzek ekluzek moved this from In Progress to Stalled in LMWG: Sprint Planning Board Mar 2, 2026
@ekluzek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ekluzek commented Mar 18, 2026

I remember where I got stuck with this. I was making changes to comply with what we decided in #3476, and got stuck in some of the unit testing for that.

Comment thread src/main/decompMod.F90
!write(iulog,*) 'WARNING: Global gi index is out of bounds'
return
end if
if ( (this%gj(g) < 1) .or. (this%gj(g) > nglob_x) ) then
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@briandobbins noticed a correction here. The above should be nglob_y

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Add a unit-test that would detect this problem

call endrun(msg="nclumps is NOT set before allocation", file=sourcefile, line=__LINE__)
return
end if
! TODO: This will be moved to the other allocate and for a smaller size ----
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Add the issue number.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Issue #3466

@samsrabin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Notes from meeting today with @ekluzek and @briandobbins:

  • Brian would like to get this done soon. Erik will evaluate the required work and post there; Brian wants to help.
  • As far as unit testing for this PR: Erik needs to fix the unit test that's currently failing, then add one covering this bug (and any others that Brian posts). It should fail, then Erik needs to fix the bug and have it pass. Then any other unit testing will be up to Erik's judgment, balancing that effort with other work on his plate.

@ekluzek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ekluzek commented Mar 25, 2026

Notes from meeting today with @ekluzek and @briandobbins:

  • Brian would like to get this done soon. Erik will evaluate the required work and post there; Brian wants to help.

We later realized that this isn't critical to do. Since, the number of clumps is basically the number of processors, and even though that's on every task -- the memory for it isn't as big as for example the number of land grid cells.

So we can let #3466 happen when there's time for it.

@ekluzek ekluzek moved this from Stalled to Todo in LMWG: Sprint Planning Board Mar 25, 2026
@ekluzek ekluzek moved this from Todo to In Progress in LMWG: Sprint Planning Board Mar 25, 2026
@ekluzek ekluzek moved this from In Progress to Todo in LMWG: Sprint Planning Board Apr 15, 2026
…bscripts are set properly and write them out in a shared section, rather than for each subgrid level, also do returns after some of the endrun calls which is needed for the PF unit tests
@ekluzek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ekluzek commented Apr 15, 2026

#3931 had an impact here and is the reason behind the unit tests not working. Taking this into account should allow me to make progress again.

@ekluzek ekluzek moved this from Todo to In Progress in LMWG: Sprint Planning Board Apr 15, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bfb bit-for-bit code health improving internal code structure to make easier to maintain (sustainability) enhancement new capability or improved behavior of existing capability performance idea or PR to improve performance (e.g. throughput, memory)

Projects

Status: In progress - b4b-dev
Status: In Progress

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants