| avbp-06may_100iter_m36_ov1_gcc | avbp-06may_100iter_m36_ov2 |
|---|---|
[ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics. | [ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics. |
[ 0 / 0 ] Fastmath not used Consider to add ffast-math to compilation flags (or replace -O3 with -Ofast) to unlock potential extra speedup by relaxing floating-point computation consistency. Warning: floating-point accuracy may be reduced and the compliance to IEEE/ISO rules/specifications for math functions will be relaxed, typically 'errno' will no longer be set after calling some math functions. | Not available for this run |
[ 0 / 3 ] Compilation of some functions is not optimized for the target processor -march=x86-64 option is used but it is not specific enough to produce efficient code. Architecture specific options are needed to produce efficient code for a specific processor ( -x(target) or -ax(target) ). | [ 0 / 3 ] Compilation of some functions is not optimized for the target processor Application run on the SKYLAKE micro-architecture while the code was specialized for CORE-AVX2. Architecture specific options are needed to produce efficient code for a specific processor ( -x(target) or -ax(target) ). |
[ 2.34 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 2.60% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g is present. Remark: if -g is indeed used, this can also be due to some compiler built-in functions (typically math) or statically linked libraries. This warning can be ignored in that case. | [ 2.06 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 13.98% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g is present. Remark: if -g is indeed used, this can also be due to some compiler built-in functions (typically math) or statically linked libraries. This warning can be ignored in that case. |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (419.94 s) To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds. | [ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (336.05 s) To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds. |
[ 2 / 2 ] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 0.97 % of the execution time) To have a representative profiling, it is advised that the category "Others" represents less than 20% of the execution time in order to analyze as much as possible of the user code | [ 2 / 2 ] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 3.68 % of the execution time) To have a representative profiling, it is advised that the category "Others" represents less than 20% of the execution time in order to analyze as much as possible of the user code |
[ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 2.64 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used |
[ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated. | [ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated. |
| avbp-06may_100iter_m36_ov1_gcc | avbp-06may_100iter_m36_ov2 |
|---|---|
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 93.87% of time | [ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 99.87% of time |
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (95.55%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (100.00%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (67.58%) If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances. | [ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (72.88%) If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances. |
[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (13.05%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (54.53%) Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex | [ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (23.44%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (49.44%) Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex |
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good On average, more than 93.88% of observed threads are actually active | [ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good On average, more than 99.88% of observed threads are actually active |
[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS2 operations BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining. | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS2 operations BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining. |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (54.53%) If the time spent in analyzed innermost loops is less than 15%, standard innermost loop optimizations such as vectorisation will have a limited impact on application performances. | [ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (49.44%) If the time spent in analyzed innermost loops is less than 15%, standard innermost loop optimizations such as vectorisation will have a limited impact on application performances. |
[ 3 / 3 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS1 operations It could be more efficient to inline by hand BLAS1 operations | [ 3 / 3 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS1 operations It could be more efficient to inline by hand BLAS1 operations |
[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions) | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions) |
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (4.91%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (4.54%), representing an hotspot for the application |
| Analysis | r0 | r1 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Loop Computation Issues | Presence of expensive FP instructions | 1 | 0 |
| Less than 10% of the FP ADD/SUB/MUL arithmetic operations are performed using FMA | 7 | 1 | |
| Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions | 2 | 8 | |
| Low iteration count | 0 | 6 | |
| Control Flow Issues | Presence of calls | 1 | 0 |
| Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 1 | 0 | |
| Presence of more than 4 paths | 0 | 3 | |
| Non-innermost loop | 0 | 3 | |
| Low iteration count | 0 | 6 | |
| Data Access Issues | Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 7 | 2 |
| Presence of indirect access | 1 | 3 | |
| Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 0 | 4 | |
| More than 20% of the loads are accessing the stack | 2 | 3 | |
| Vectorization Roadblocks | Presence of calls | 1 | 0 |
| Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 1 | 0 | |
| Presence of more than 4 paths | 0 | 3 | |
| Non-innermost loop | 0 | 3 | |
| Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 7 | 2 | |
| Presence of indirect access | 1 | 3 | |
| Out of user code | 1 | 1 | |
| Inefficient Vectorization | Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 0 | 4 |