Align jedi_lfric_tests linear model/adjoint testing to adjoint_tests and linear_model

[tom-j-h]

PR Summary

Sci/Tech Reviewer:
Code Reviewer:

PLEASE NOTE - this is a follow-on to #132. The branch was created from #132's branch in my fork, but I can't make a PR into that branch because then I would be stuck in my fork. So, to look at the actual changes relevant to this PR alone, look at the diff of this branch with #132's branch: tom-j-h/lfric_apps@jelf_adjoint_test_tolerance_nml...tom-j-h:lfric_apps:align_jedi_lfric_tests_to_linear_model

Similar to #84, but for applications of jedi_lfric_tests that use the linear and adjoint models.

This change relies on the same small code change in science/adjoint as #84. It is also very useful to be able to set adjoint test tolerance via a namelist variable () for running the strict vs. relaxed adjoint tests, hence the order of branching.

A bug (incorrect adjoint) relating to the incremental wind interpolation added in https://code.metoffice.gov.uk/trac/lfric_apps/ticket/369 has arisen due to the changes here. The specific cause has not been identified. For now, this is switched off. This is not high priority, hence not investigating and fixing it as part of this work. Have opened #128.

The same approach to handling the bug highlighted in #84 (rrt_equals_dt) is taken here; this has issue #87.

• linked Avoid panel_decomposition_mod causing a divide-by-zero lfric_core#227

• is blocked-by jelf adjoint test tolerance namelist variable #132

• blocks #

• closes Align jedi_lfric_tests linear model/adjoint testing to adjoint_tests/linear_model #85

Code Quality Checklist

• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• My code follows the project's style guidelines
• Comments have been included that aid understanding and enhance the readability of the code
• My changes generate no new warnings
• All automated checks in the CI pipeline have completed successfully

Testing

• I have tested this change locally, using the LFRic Core rose-stem suite
• If required (e.g. API changes) I have also run the LFRic Apps test suite using this branch
• If any tests fail (rose-stem or CI) the reason is understood and acceptable (e.g. kgo changes)
• I have added tests to cover new functionality as appropriate (e.g. system tests, unit tests, etc.)
• Any new tests have been assigned an appropriate amount of compute resource and have been allocated to an appropriate testing group (i.e. the developer tests are for jobs which use a small amount of compute resource and complete in a matter of minutes)

trac.log

Security Considerations

• I have reviewed my changes for potential security issues
• Sensitive data is properly handled (if applicable)
• Authentication and authorisation are properly implemented (if applicable)

Performance Impact

• Performance of the code has been considered and, if applicable, suitable performance measurements have been conducted

AI Assistance and Attribution

• Some of the content of this change has been produced with the assistance of Generative AI tool name (e.g., Met Office Github Copilot Enterprise, Github Copilot Personal, ChatGPT GPT-4, etc) and I have followed the Simulation Systems AI policy (including attribution labels)

Documentation

• Where appropriate I have updated documentation related to this change and confirmed that it builds correctly

PSyclone Approval

• If you have edited any PSyclone-related code (e.g. PSyKAl-lite, Kernel interface, optimisation scripts, LFRic data structure code) then please contact the TCD Team

Sci/Tech Review

• I understand this area of code and the changes being added
• The proposed changes correspond to the pull request description
• Documentation is sufficient (do documentation papers need updating)
• Sufficient testing has been completed

(Please alert the code reviewer via a tag when you have approved the SR)

Code Review

• All dependencies have been resolved
• Related Issues have been properly linked and addressed
• CLA compliance has been confirmed
• Code quality standards have been met
• Tests are adequate and have passed
• Documentation is complete and accurate
• Security considerations have been addressed
• Performance impact is acceptable