[MITgcm-devel] seaice_itd experiment

Sat May 4 15:04:01 EDT 2013

Torge,
I realised after writing the email that the 2 other output have
not changed and only the main test was giving different output.
So no need to update the 2 others.
Ans with the few fix, it should run & pass with gfortran -devel
and with g77.
Cheers,
Jean-Michel

On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 11:08:51AM -0700, Torge Martin wrote:
> Yes, test results will need an update.
> Thanks for taking care of the non-pickup case.
> 
> Torge
> 
> 
> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Jean-Michel Campin <jmc at ocean.mit.edu>wrote:
> 
> > Hi Torge,
> >
> > Thanks for this update.
> > I think that with these changes (in pkg/seaice) the seaice_itd/results
> > output files will need to be updated, right ?
> >
> > I am going to make few little changes and will check-in an updated
> > version of seaice_itd/results/output.txt (the one test which does not
> > rely on pickup-files, since we are not sure if the restart works).
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Jean-Michel
> >
> > On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 01:27:25PM -0700, Torge Martin wrote:
> > > Now I've updated the main branch (pkg/seaice):
> > > - include floes size dependent lateral melt for ITD case in seaice_growth
> > > (needs further testing)
> > > - remove numerous print and message lines in seaice_model and
> > > seaice_growth, which I introduced when starting with ITD development
> > >
> > > need to fix the pickup next to get the verification experiment running
> > >
> > > Torge
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Torge Martin <torge.martin at gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Jean-Michel,
> > > >
> > > > good points, thanks for the "to do" overview.
> > > >
> > > > 1) by introducing the verification experiment Patrick and I discovered
> > > > that the pickup is not working properly with ITD (pickup files written
> > with
> > > > ITD contain zeros only). That's one issue I am working on, maybe
> > there's
> > > > more once this one is fixed ... I'll look for uninitialized variables
> > as
> > > > well.
> > > >
> > > > 2) I grew up with f90, sorry. How do I best check for code not
> > compatible
> > > > with g77?
> > > >
> > > > Your help with 1) and 2) would be greatly appreciated.
> > > >
> > > > 3) just have removed all "ToM" comments; will remove print statements
> > > > next; and check-in on main branch.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Torge
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Jean-Michel Campin <jmc at ocean.mit.edu
> > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi Torge,
> > > >>
> > > >> I have few remarks regarding the seaice_itd verification experiment
> > > >> (and related ITD code in pkg/seaice):
> > > >> 1) since the new experiment seaice_itd was added, it has not been
> > running
> > > >> on many
> > > >>  compiler/platform and is not running (in fact, all of the 3 tests)
> > with
> > > >> strick
> > > >>  compiler checks (the "reference" test on baudelaire, using gfortran
> > and
> > > >> "-devel"
> > > >>  option, see, e.g.,
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > http://mitgcm.org/testing/results/2013_05/tr_baudelaire_20130502_4/summary.txt
> > > >> ).
> > > >>  This is likely due to un-initialised local variable causing a
> > Floating
> > > >> exception.
> > > >>  It will be useful to fix this, since
> > > >>   a) it might also help you.
> > > >>   b) once it's fixed, and it run fine, we will be sure that the code
> > is
> > > >> safe.
> > > >>   c) but it might happen that once this 1rst problem is fixed, with
> > these
> > > >> strick-checks,
> > > >>     we could discover an other Pb that shows up later in the run/call
> > > >> sequence.
> > > >> 2) there are few f90 instructions that prevent to compile with g77,
> > > >>  this is not very serious, but should be easy to fix.
> > > >>  And when it's fixed, the code get tested with more compiler and on
> > > >>  more platforms.
> > > >>
> > > >>  I might be able to help a little bit on these 2 Pb, but I am not sure
> > > >>  if the current pkg/seaice version is "up to date" - since you
> > checked in
> > > >> some
> > > >>  other thing in contrib.
> > > >>  This is one reason why it would be better to make future changes in
> > > >>  pkg/seaice instead of in contrib, so that it's tested, and everyone
> > works
> > > >>  with tested version.
> > > >>
> > > >> And regrading the ITD code, just 2 details:
> > > >> I don't think it's really useful to keep commented lines like:
> > > >> > CToM<<<
> > > >> > C>>>ToM
> > > >>  since we can always check with CVS (and cvsview) who made which
> > > >> modification
> > > >>  (+ it's generally within #ifdef SEAICE_ITD / #endif).
> > > >>
> > > >> And also, it would be nice to cleanup the many debug prints in
> > > >>  pkg/seaice/seaice_model.F as mentioned earlier
> > > >>  http://mitgcm.org/pipermail/mitgcm-devel/2012-October/005642.html
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >> Jean-Michel
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> > > >> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> > > >> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > MITgcm-devel mailing list
> > > MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> > > http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > MITgcm-devel mailing list
> > MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> > http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
> >

> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel