[MITgcm-devel] Fwd: [MITgcm-cvs] MITgcm/doc CVS Commit

Jean-Michel Campin jmc at ocean.mit.edu
Mon Jun 30 08:10:52 EDT 2014 

Hi Martin,

Our old 32-bit cluster has only few nodes left, and it take long
time to run all the different tests which can't all run at the same
time. And in particular, last Friday, the last 2 started only after 
you checked-in the changes. So when these 2 were done, I found that 
there was a problem with seaice-dynamics experiments.

Just had a quick look at the Friday version of seaice_lsr.F (1.93):
might be that uTmp,vTmp are not needed within SEAICE_LSR_TRIDIAGU/V
but we do need the part "save uIce prior to iteration" (that is gone
in v 1.93) since it's used to test for convergence.

And good that you manged to improve the adjoint !

Cheers,
Jean-Michel

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 10:10:24AM +0200, Martin Losch wrote:
> Hi  Jean-Michel,
> 
> don’t get me wrong, I probably made a mistake with testreport, i.e. running it in the wrong directory or whatever …
> 
> Now I did get these same FAILS and I checked in a version, that includes u/vTmp. I still don’t see, where they become necessary, but maybe it’s better this way (didn’t check the effect of removing them on the vectorization of seaice_lsr_tridiagu/v, etc.)
> 
> I guess on Friday I was to excited to be able to get rid off the extensive recomputation warnings in seaice_lsr, that got carried away and removed too much stuff without proper checking. The fact that the adjoint results are not affected is obvious: They don’t seem to use seaice_lsr in reverse mode, except for lab_sea: there the adjoint is different indeed, and since it is different already I modified and updated this experiment to actually take advantage of my new STORE directives and to increase the differences.
> 
> Martin
> 
> On Jun 29, 2014, at 5:09 PM, Jean-Michel Campin <jmc at ocean.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Martin,
> > 
> > here attached is the testreport output the I obtained last Friday 
> > after your changes.
> > I am currently re-running testreport to check that I did not make a 
> > big mistake last Friday (putting back your modified seaice_lsr.F & 
> > seaice_preconditioner.F), but it looks similar to the one
> > I got Friday (expected, since it's the same code).
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Jean-Michel
> > 
> > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 12:37:51PM +0200, Martin Losch wrote:
> >> Hi Jean-Michel,
> >> 
> >> That's very interesting, because I did run testreport on my local linux box that usually gives the same results as baudelaire with gfortran both for forward and adoint tests. The only changing experiment I found was labsea, which always gives slightly different results, no matter what you do. And I even ran adjoint offline exf seaice on baudelaire. Not sure where I went wrong. The most important changes were about the adjoint. On Monday, I will retry with keeping the uvtmp fields although I do not see why they should be important at all.
> >> 
> >> Martin
> >> 
> >>> On 27.06.2014, at 22:25, Jean-Michel Campin <jmc at ocean.mit.edu> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Hi Martin,
> >>> 
> >>> Did you run testreport after your changes ?
> >>> When I try (with MPI on old 32-bit cluster with g77 and without
> >>> MPI on baudelaire with gfortran) I am getting a FAIL for
> >>> most (if not all) of the exp that uses seaice-dynamics with LSR 
> >>> 
> >>> Also, this uTmp,vTmp was added in seaice_lsr.F revision 62
> >>> by me (harder to go back in time before that since it was re-written
> >>> substancially), and I don't think it was useless.
> >>> 
> >>> I am thinking of changing back seaice_lsr.F & seaice_preconditioner.F
> >>> until you figure out if/how uTmp/vTmp can be removed without changing
> >>> the results.
> >>> 
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Jean-Michel
> >>> 
> >>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 04:38:01PM +0200, Martin Losch wrote:
> >>>> let’s see, how much of the model I messed up this time … (o:
> >>>> 
> >>>> Have a good weekend,
> >>>> Martin
> >>>> 
> >>>> Begin forwarded message:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> From: Martin Losch <mlosch at forge.csail.mit.edu>
> >>>>> Subject: [MITgcm-cvs] MITgcm/doc CVS Commit
> >>>>> Date: June 27, 2014 at 4:37:03 PM GMT+2
> >>>>> To: <mitgcm-cvs at mitgcm.org>
> >>>>> Reply-To: <MITgcm-cvs at mitgcm.org>
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Update of /u/gcmpack/MITgcm/doc
> >>>>> In directory forge:/tmp/cvs-serv5798/doc
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Modified Files:
> >>>>>   tag-index 
> >>>>> Log Message:
> >>>>> add this to the tag-index:
> >>>>> - remove unnecessary u/vTmp from subroutine call of
> >>>>>  seaice_lsr_tridiagu/v
> >>>>> - remove some store directives and add new ones in an effort to get
> >>>>>  finally rid off the recomputation warnings. This is successful
> >>>>>  for SEAICE_VECTORIZE_LSR defined (i.e. no extensive recomputation
> >>>>>  warnings left), but there are still too many recomputations on the
> >>>>>  solver iteration level
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> MITgcm-cvs mailing list
> >>>>> MITgcm-cvs at mitgcm.org
> >>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-cvs
> >>> 
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
> > <tr_out.txt>_______________________________________________
> > 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

More information about the MITgcm-devel mailing list