Bring in cam_in/cam_out variables to the registry

[cacraigucar]

Tag name (required for release branches):
Originator(s): cacraigucar nusbaume

Description (include the issue title, and the keyword ['closes', 'fixes', 'resolves'] followed by the issue number):
Closes #23

Describe any changes made to build system: N/A

Describe any changes made to the namelist: N/A

List any changes to the defaults for the input datasets (e.g. boundary datasets): N/A

List all files eliminated and why:
D src/control/camsrfexch.F90
D src/control/camsrfexch.meta
- camsrfexch is not needed in CAM-SIMA and was just a temporary routine until cam_in/cam_out were fully implemented

List all files added and what they do:
A test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt_mf.F90
A test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt_mf.meta
- test new functionality

List all existing files that have been modified, and describe the changes:
(Helpful git command: git diff --name-status development...<your_branch_name>)
M .gitmodules
- Update atmospheric_physics external

M src/control/cam_comp.F90
M src/cpl/nuopc/atm_comp_nuopc.F90
M src/dynamics/mpas/stepon.F90
M src/dynamics/none/stepon.F90
M src/dynamics/se/stepon.F90
- Use cam_in/cam_out from the registry now (physics_types)

M src/cpl/nuopc/atm_import_export.F90
M src/cpl/nuopc/atm_stream_ndep.F90
- Use cam_in/cam_out from the registry now (physics_types)
- Fix bugs in code which was previously #if def'd out

M src/physics/utils/phys_comp.F90
- New interface for allocate_physics_types_fields

M src/data/generate_registry_data.py
- Grab dimensions via 'use' statements instead of input arguments in the generated 'allocate_physics_types_fields' subroutine to allow for arbitrary registry variable order

M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_complete.F90
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_complete.meta
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt2.F90
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt_array.F90
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt_eul.F90
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt_eul.meta
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt_fv.F90
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt_fv.meta
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt_se.F90
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_ddt_se.meta
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_parameter.F90
M test/unit/python/sample_files/physics_types_simple.F90
M test/unit/python/sample_files/reg_good_complete.xml
M test/unit/python/sample_files/reg_good_ddt.xml
M test/unit/python/sample_files/reg_good_mf.xml
M test/unit/python/test_registry.py
- update tests as needed with the new code

M src/data/registry.xml
- Fully implement cam_in/cam_out

If there are new failures (compared to the test/existing-test-failures.txt file),
have them OK'd by the gatekeeper, note them here, and add them to the file.
If there are baseline differences, include the test and the reason for the
diff. What is the nature of the change? Roundoff?

derecho/intel/aux_sima: All BFB

derecho/gnu/aux_sima: All BFB

[nusbaume]

@cacraigucar I believe the registry generator has now been successfully updated to bring in dimensions via Fortran use statements instead of subroutine arguments, which should eliminate any registry dimension ordering issues. Of course if you still find that you are failing tests please let me know. Thanks!

[jimmielin]

Thanks @cacraigucar and @nusbaume! I took a first look and everything looks good, I had one minor comment. I can take a more complete look after it's lifted out of draft when you're ready. I'll also pull this into my HB branch to see if everything continues to work.

[jimmielin]

Thanks @cacraigucar! I had a few questions and minor comments. I think we might be able to remove ccpp_constant_four for now as the only field that's declared with it doesn't appear to need that dimension.

[nusbaume]

Thanks @cacraigucar! I have some change requests, but hopefully all of them are minor. Of course if you do run into any problems or issues with any of my requests just let me know. Thanks again!

[cacraigucar]

First round of review comments addressed

[cacraigucar]

More changes

[jimmielin]

Thanks @cacraigucar!

[nusbaume]

Thanks for resolving all of my concerns @cacraigucar! Everything looks good to me now.