Kai Bao

jenkins build this please

As promised, reporting back the checking of the regression failures.   Will provide some information regarding the ones need more detailed investigations.

The following three cases are the ones need a little more detailed checking. (black line is the master result, green line is the PR result) [mpi.compareECLFiles_flow+0A4_GRCTRL_LRAT_LRAT_GGR_BASE_MODEL2_STW](https://ci.opm-project.org/job/opm-simulators-PR-builder/5653/testReport/junit/(root)/mpi/compareECLFiles_flow_0A4_GRCTRL_LRAT_LRAT_GGR_BASE_MODEL2_STW/)  [mpi.compareECLFiles_flow+UDQ_WCONPROD](https://ci.opm-project.org/job/opm-simulators-PR-builder/5653/testReport/junit/(root)/mpi/compareECLFiles_flow_UDQ_WCONPROD/)  [mpi.compareECLFiles_flow+0_BASE_MODEL2_LET](https://ci.opm-project.org/job/opm-simulators-PR-builder/5653/testReport/junit/(root)/mpi/compareECLFiles_flow_0_BASE_MODEL2_LET/)...

Checking regression failures with big scale is quite expensive. It is good if we can have some more automatic way to help. And also, because it is quite some efforts...

> Looks like there are some issues that needs fixing here. Seems to be missing a `calculateExplicitQuantities()` in the potential calculations for STW. Hence, with the PR, there is zero...

not sure about the best way to do this. Do you think it might be easier to get things in if you split them among multiple PRs? The combined effects...

jenkins build this please

maybe we should incorporate https://github.com/OPM/opm-simulators/pull/5280 to this PR. @totto82

> jenkins build this opm-tests=5157 please OPM/opm-tests#5157 does not exist and https://github.com/OPM/opm-tests/pull/1165 can not be used due to merging conflicts. You probably should update_data again to get a reference update...

> I understand the intention here (ameliorate errors due to explicit treatment of pressure-drop along well), but I did not include this second round of updates in computeWellPotentialsImplicit because I...