gcc_o3_ov1_o52_stab_chunk2000 | gcc_ofast_ov1_o52_chunk2000 | icx_fast_ov1_o52_chunk2000 |
---|---|---|
[ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=skylake-avx512 is used | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=skylake-avx512 is used | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -x HOST is used |
[ 2.40 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 0.01% 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. | [ 2.40 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 0.01% 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. | [ 2.40 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 0.01% 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 / 2 ] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 0.19 % 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 0.19 % 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 0.20 % 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 | [ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (33.35 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 (33.10 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 (33.15 s) To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds. |
gcc_o3_ov1_o52_stab_chunk2000 | gcc_ofast_ov1_o52_chunk2000 | icx_fast_ov1_o52_chunk2000 |
---|---|---|
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 98.39% of time | [ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 99.62% of time | [ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 98.78% of time |
[ 0 / 4 ] Affinity stability is lower than 90% (0.00%) Threads are often migrating to other CPU cores/threads. For OpenMP, typically set (OMP_PLACES=cores OMP_PROC_BIND=close) or (OMP_PLACES=threads OMP_PROC_BIND=spread). With OpenMPI + OpenMP, use --bind-to cores --map-by node:PE=$OMP_NUM_THREADS --report-bindings. With IntelMPI + OpenMP, set I_MPI_PIN_DOMAIN=omp:compact or I_MPI_PIN_DOMAIN=omp:scatter and use -print-rank-map. | [ 0 / 4 ] Affinity stability is lower than 90% (0.00%) Threads are often migrating to other CPU cores/threads. For OpenMP, typically set (OMP_PLACES=cores OMP_PROC_BIND=close) or (OMP_PLACES=threads OMP_PROC_BIND=spread). With OpenMPI + OpenMP, use --bind-to cores --map-by node:PE=$OMP_NUM_THREADS --report-bindings. With IntelMPI + OpenMP, set I_MPI_PIN_DOMAIN=omp:compact or I_MPI_PIN_DOMAIN=omp:scatter and use -print-rank-map. | [ 0 / 4 ] Affinity stability is lower than 90% (0.00%) Threads are often migrating to other CPU cores/threads. For OpenMP, typically set (OMP_PLACES=cores OMP_PROC_BIND=close) or (OMP_PLACES=threads OMP_PROC_BIND=spread). With OpenMPI + OpenMP, use --bind-to cores --map-by node:PE=$OMP_NUM_THREADS --report-bindings. With IntelMPI + OpenMP, set I_MPI_PIN_DOMAIN=omp:compact or I_MPI_PIN_DOMAIN=omp:scatter and use -print-rank-map. |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (69.77%) 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 (70.74%) 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 (72.63%) 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 (34.03%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (35.74%) 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 (34.52%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (36.22%) 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 (22.68%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (49.96%) Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex |
[ 3 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (15.00%) 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. | [ 3 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (14.15%) 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. | [ 3 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (15.01%) 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. |
[ 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 (35.74%) 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 (36.22%) 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 (49.96%) 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% (35.74%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (36.21%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (36.23%), representing an hotspot for the application |
Analysis | r_1 | r_2 | r_3 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Loop Computation Issues | Less than 10% of the FP ADD/SUB/MUL arithmetic operations are performed using FMA | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
Low iteration count | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Control Flow Issues | Presence of calls | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Presence of more than 4 paths | 2 | 2 | 1 | |
Non-innermost loop | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
Low iteration count | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Data Access Issues | Presence of indirect access | 1 | 1 | 2 |
Presence of expensive instructions: scatter/gather | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 2 | 2 | 1 | |
More than 20% of the loads are accessing the stack | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
Vectorization Roadblocks | Presence of calls | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Presence of more than 4 paths | 2 | 2 | 1 | |
Non-innermost loop | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
Presence of indirect access | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
Inefficient Vectorization | Presence of expensive instructions: scatter/gather | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 2 | 2 | 1 |