Add saltflux option.

[dabail10]

For detailed information about submitting Pull Requests (PRs) to the CICE-Consortium,
please refer to: https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/About-Us/wiki/Resource-Index#information-for-developers

PR checklist

• Short (1 sentence) summary of your PR:
  This adds the option to do a "constant" salinity reference for the salt and fresh water fluxes versus a 'prognostic' option that uses the mushy-layer prognostic salinity.
• Developer(s):
  dabail10 (D. Bailey)
• Suggest PR reviewers from list in the column to the right.
• Please copy the PR test results link or provide a summary of testing completed below.
  Bfb with aux_cice suite in CESM.
  https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/Test-Results/wiki/icepack_by_hash_forks#b3b48bf7a7b27c6cf4d89261151bbee0f15a525d
• How much do the PR code changes differ from the unmodified code?
  • bit for bit
  • different at roundoff level
  • more substantial
• Does this PR create or have dependencies on CICE or any other models?
  • Yes
  • No
• Does this PR add any new test cases?
  • Yes
  • No
• Is the documentation being updated? ("Documentation" includes information on the wiki or in the .rst files from doc/source/, which are used to create the online technical docs at https://readthedocs.org/projects/cice-consortium-cice/.)
  • Yes
  • No, does the documentation need to be updated at a later time?
    • Yes
    • No
• Please provide any additional information or relevant details below:
  There is an associated CICE tag to go with this.

[apcraig]

Please do standalone Icepack testing including regression testing.

[dabail10]

I did the Icepack regression testing with intel, pgi, and gnu on cheyenne. Everything is bfb.

[apcraig]

Looks good. Do we need to add a test for saltflux_option = prognostic in Icepack and/or CICE?

[dabail10]

I agree. I should probably add tests for both.

[apcraig]

Sounds good. Maybe we can merge the Icepack PR today and the CICE PR in the next day or two then I can start testing for the release. Thanks!

[apcraig]

How about if we call the salt test "saltprog" instead of just "salt"? Does the new test pass?

[dabail10]

If we are doing a longer name I would prefer saltflux.

[dabail10]

The test passes in CICE with the updated Icepack submodule.

[apcraig]

saltflux is OK too. Or saltfluxprog. Can you also do a quick run with standalone Icepack for the new test. Lets just make sure it runs and passes. Then we can merge. Thanks!

[dabail10]

Did quick_suite on intel.

./icepack.setup --suite quick_suite --mach cheyenne --env intel --testid saltflux4 -s saltflux

10 measured results of 10 total results
10 of 10 tests PASSED
0 of 10 tests PENDING
0 of 10 tests MISSING data
0 of 10 tests FAILED

[apcraig]

The new test is in the base_suite.

[apcraig]

OK, I see you ran quick_suite with -s saltflux. I guess that's OK too.

[apcraig]

You need to add set_nml.saltflux to your push.

[dabail10]

Whoops. Should be there now.