[MITgcm-devel] adjoint and vectorizing options

[Martin Losch]

Hi Patrick, Jean-Michel,

I have returned to the adjoint of seaice_lsr. I cannot claim success, but I have tried to clean up  the tridiagonal solvers, so that their logic corresponds very much to “model/src/solver_tridiagonal.F” 

The adjoint still explodes (for cost_ice_flag=7, which is bascially uice**2), but I can get rid of the extra stores in seaice_lsr_tridiagu/v, so I would like to check in this code probably even today, as a new starting point.

There are issues: 
- the adjoint simulations of lab_sea changes

- I modified the action of the SEAICE_VECTORIZE_LSR_ZEBRA flag, so that this “zebra” algorithm can also be used without SEAICE_VECTORIZE_LSR. This means that the name is misleading and I would like to rename it to SEAICE_LSR_ZEBRA (shorter and more accurate). How do we deal with this? Should I just do it (becaues basically nobody except me and maybe some AWI people uses this flag anyway, or should I make sure that the model stops if the obsolete flat SEAICE_VECTORIZE_LSR_ZEBRA is defined?

- I would like my “zebra” code to be tested. Since lab_sea will change anyway, this may be good option. What do you think?

And then: should I wait until after the weekend for any of these changes, or should I go ahead now?

Martin