| aocc_10 | gcc_9 | icx_10 |
|---|---|---|
[ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics. | [ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics. | [ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics. |
[ 3.00 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules (99.98%) comes from functions compiled with architecture specialization option -march=znver5 | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules (99.98%) comes from functions compiled with architecture specialization option -march=znver5 | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules (99.99%) comes from functions compiled with architecture specialization option -axCORE-AVX |
[ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions with source/debug info -g option gives access to debugging informations, such are source locations. | [ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions with source/debug info -g option gives access to debugging informations, such are source locations. | [ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions with source/debug info -g option gives access to debugging informations, such are source locations. |
[ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions with compilation options informations and -fno-omit-frame-pointer is present -fno-omit-frame-pointer improves the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling. | [ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions with compilation options informations and -fno-omit-frame-pointer is present -fno-omit-frame-pointer improves the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling. | [ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions with compilation options informations and -fno-omit-frame-pointer is present -fno-omit-frame-pointer improves the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling. |
[ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used |
[ 2 / 2 ] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 0.00 % 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 0.00 % 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 0.00 % 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 |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (27.99 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 (14.12 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 (35.75 s) To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds. |
[ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated. | [ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated. | [ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated. |
| aocc_10 | gcc_9 | icx_10 |
|---|---|---|
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 99.82% of time | [ 0 / 4 ] CPU activity is below 90% (23.39%) CPU cores are idle more than 10% of time. Threads supposed to run on these cores are probably IO/sync waiting. Some hints: use faster filesystems to read/write data, improve parallel load balancing and/or scheduling. | [ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 99.82% of time |
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.92%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (97.35%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.93%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned |
[ 3 / 3 ] Functions mostly use all threads Functions running on a reduced number of threads (typically sequential code) cover less than 10% of application walltime (6.93%) | [ 3 / 3 ] Functions mostly use all threads Functions running on a reduced number of threads (typically sequential code) cover less than 10% of application walltime (4.29%) | [ 3 / 3 ] Functions mostly use all threads Functions running on a reduced number of threads (typically sequential code) cover less than 10% of application walltime (4.37%) |
[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (41.93%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (51.79%) Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex | [ 0 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (66.42%) greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage (7.98%) Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex | [ 0 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (91.04%) greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage (4.69%) 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 98.73% of observed threads are actually active | [ 0 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (76.84%) On average, more than 10% of observed threads are idle. Such threads are probably IO/sync waiting. Some hints: use faster filesystems to read/write data, improve parallel load balancing and/or scheduling. | [ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good On average, more than 98.89% 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. | [ 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 (51.79%) 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. | [ 0 / 4 ] Too little time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (7.98%) 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. | [ 0 / 4 ] Too little time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (4.69%) 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 | [ 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) | [ 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% (45.12%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (65.87%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (90.74%), representing an hotspot for the application |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (93.71%) 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 (74.40%) 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 (95.73%) If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances. |
| Analysis | r0 | r1 | r2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loop Computation Issues | Presence of expensive FP instructions | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Less than 10% of the FP ADD/SUB/MUL arithmetic operations are performed using FMA | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
| Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
| Control Flow Issues | Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Presence of more than 4 paths | 0 | 4 | 3 | |
| Non-innermost loop | 2 | 5 | 4 | |
| Data Access Issues | Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 4 | 1 | 2 |
| Presence of indirect access | 3 | 0 | 2 | |
| More than 20% of the loads are accessing the stack | 3 | 2 | 5 | |
| Vectorization Roadblocks | Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Presence of more than 4 paths | 0 | 4 | 3 | |
| Non-innermost loop | 2 | 5 | 4 | |
| Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 4 | 1 | 2 | |
| Presence of indirect access | 3 | 0 | 2 | |