[MITgcm-devel] adjoint and vectorizing options

[Jean-Michel Campin]

Hi Martin,

I've just a new tag (checkpoint65m) since it was time, and might also be
better if tour changes are changing some output.
As far as I am concerned, you can go with your modifications.

Cheers,
Jean-Michel

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 10:06:43AM -0400, gael forget wrote:
> Hi Jean-Michel and Martin,
> 
> thanks Jean-Michel for catching this failure that seems to have originated from fast opt.de:
> > ssh: Could not resolve hostname fastopt.de: Temporary failure in name resolution
> 
> I just completed the cs32 adjoint test, and started llc90 with "-addr jmc at mitgcm.org"
> 
> As a side note, I am planning to revise a few more things in pkg/ctrl later today, 
> which I believe are completely independent of Martin?s seaice revision.
> 
> Cheers,
> Gael
> 
> On Jun 12, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Jean-Michel Campin <jmc at ocean.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Martin,
> > 
> > I don't see problems in make the changes you propose. 
> > 
> > Regarding timing, I would like to check with Gael why his AD glacier
> > latest test are all failing before further changes in pkg/seaice.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Jean-Michel
> > 
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 12:52:00PM +0200, Martin Losch wrote:
> >> 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
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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