OV - exec - Loop 2296

0x2a5c30 MOVQ	$-0x1,(%RDX,%RAX,8)    [4]

0x2a5c38 INC	%RAX

0x2a5c3b CMP	%RAX,-0x28(%RBP)    [2]

0x2a5c3f JLE	2a5c65

0x2a5c41 CMPQ	$0,(%RCX,%RAX,8)    [3]

0x2a5c46 JLE	2a5c30

0x2a5c48 MOV	-0x20(%RBP),%RDI    [2]

0x2a5c4c MOV	%RDI,(%RDX,%RAX,8)    [4]

0x2a5c50 MOV	-0x20(%RBP),%RDI    [2]

0x2a5c54 MOV	%RAX,(%RSI,%RDI,8)    [1]

0x2a5c58 INCQ	-0x20(%RBP)    [2]

0x2a5c5c INC	%RAX

0x2a5c5f CMP	%RAX,-0x28(%RBP)    [2]

0x2a5c63 JG	2a5c41

/home/eoseret/qaas_runs_ZEN5/173-989-6379/intel/AMG/build/AMG/AMG/parcsr_ls/par_strength.c: 1268 - 1278

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1268:       for (i = i_begin; i < i_end; i++)

1269:       {

1270:          if (CF_marker[i] > 0)

1271:          {

1272:             fine_to_coarse[i] = num_coarse_private;

1273:             coarse_to_fine[num_coarse_private] = i;

1274:             num_coarse_private++;

1275:          }

1276:          else

1277:          {

1278:             fine_to_coarse[i] = -1;

Coverage (%)	Name	Source Location	Module
►97.85+	__kmp_invoke_microtask		libomp.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func		libomp.so
○	__kmp_launch_thread		libomp.so
○	__kmp_launch_worker(void*)		libomp.so
○	start_thread		libc.so.6
○	__GI___clone3		libc.so.6
►2.15+	__kmp_invoke_microtask		libomp.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func		libomp.so
○	__kmp_fork_call		libomp.so
○	__kmpc_fork_call		libomp.so
○	hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS	par_strength.c:1253	exec

min	med	avg	max

Percentile Index	10	20	30	40	50	60	70	80	90	100
Value

min	med	avg	max

Percentile Index	10	20	30	40	50	60	70	80	90	100
Value

Path /

Metric	Value
CQA speedup if no scalar integer	1.00
CQA speedup if FP arith vectorized	1.00
CQA speedup if fully vectorized	9.43
CQA speedup if no inter-iteration dependency	NA
CQA speedup if next bottleneck killed	1.40
Bottlenecks
Function	hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined
Source	par_strength.c:1268-1278
Source loop unroll info	not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop
Source loop unroll confidence level	max
Unroll/vectorization loop type	NA
Unroll factor	NA
CQA cycles	1.38
CQA cycles if no scalar integer	1.38
CQA cycles if FP arith vectorized	1.38
CQA cycles if fully vectorized	0.15
Front-end cycles	0.94
P0 cycles	0.83
P1 cycles	0.83
P2 cycles	0.83
P3 cycles	0.83
P4 cycles	0.83
P5 cycles	0.83
P6 cycles	1.25
P7 cycles	1.25
P8 cycles	1.25
P9 cycles	1.25
P10 cycles	0.00
P11 cycles	0.00
P12 cycles	0.00
P13 cycles	0.00
P14 cycles	0.00
P15 cycles	0.00
DIV/SQRT cycles	0.00
Inter-iter dependencies cycles	1
FE+BE cycles (UFS)	NA
Stall cycles (UFS)	NA
Nb insns	8.00
Nb uops	7.50
Nb loads	3.50
Nb stores	2.00
Nb stack references	1.50
FLOP/cycle	0.00
Nb FLOP add-sub	0.00
Nb FLOP mul	0.00
Nb FLOP fma	0.00
Nb FLOP div	0.00
Nb FLOP rcp	0.00
Nb FLOP sqrt	0.00
Nb FLOP rsqrt	0.00
Bytes/cycle	30.29
Bytes prefetched	0.00
Bytes loaded	28.00
Bytes stored	16.00
Stride 0	1.00
Stride 1	2.00
Stride n	0.00
Stride unknown	0.00
Stride indirect	0.50
Vectorization ratio all	0.00
Vectorization ratio load	0.00
Vectorization ratio store	0.00
Vectorization ratio mul	NA
Vectorization ratio add_sub	NA
Vectorization ratio fma	NA
Vectorization ratio div_sqrt	NA
Vectorization ratio other	0.00
Vector-efficiency ratio all	10.94
Vector-efficiency ratio load	12.50
Vector-efficiency ratio store	9.38
Vector-efficiency ratio mul	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio add_sub	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio fma	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio div_sqrt	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio other	12.50

Metric	Value
CQA speedup if no scalar integer	1.00
CQA speedup if FP arith vectorized	1.00
CQA speedup if fully vectorized	8.00
CQA speedup if no inter-iteration dependency	NA
CQA speedup if next bottleneck killed	1.56
Bottlenecks	P6, P7, P8, P9,
Function	hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined
Source	par_strength.c:1268-1278
Source loop unroll info	not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop
Source loop unroll confidence level	max
Unroll/vectorization loop type	NA
Unroll factor	NA
CQA cycles	1.75
CQA cycles if no scalar integer	1.75
CQA cycles if FP arith vectorized	1.75
CQA cycles if fully vectorized	0.22
Front-end cycles	1.13
P0 cycles	0.83
P1 cycles	0.83
P2 cycles	0.83
P3 cycles	0.83
P4 cycles	0.83
P5 cycles	0.83
P6 cycles	1.75
P7 cycles	1.75
P8 cycles	1.75
P9 cycles	1.75
P10 cycles	0.00
P11 cycles	0.00
P12 cycles	0.00
P13 cycles	0.00
P14 cycles	0.00
P15 cycles	0.00
DIV/SQRT cycles	0.00
Inter-iter dependencies cycles	1
FE+BE cycles (UFS)	NA
Stall cycles (UFS)	NA
Nb insns	10.00
Nb uops	9.00
Nb loads	5.00
Nb stores	3.00
Nb stack references	2.00
FLOP/cycle	0.00
Nb FLOP add-sub	0.00
Nb FLOP mul	0.00
Nb FLOP fma	0.00
Nb FLOP div	0.00
Nb FLOP rcp	0.00
Nb FLOP sqrt	0.00
Nb FLOP rsqrt	0.00
Bytes/cycle	36.57
Bytes prefetched	0.00
Bytes loaded	40.00
Bytes stored	24.00
Stride 0	1.00
Stride 1	2.00
Stride n	0.00
Stride unknown	0.00
Stride indirect	1.00
Vectorization ratio all	0.00
Vectorization ratio load	0.00
Vectorization ratio store	0.00
Vectorization ratio mul	NA
Vectorization ratio add_sub	NA
Vectorization ratio fma	NA
Vectorization ratio div_sqrt	NA
Vectorization ratio other	0.00
Vector-efficiency ratio all	12.50
Vector-efficiency ratio load	12.50
Vector-efficiency ratio store	12.50
Vector-efficiency ratio mul	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio add_sub	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio fma	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio div_sqrt	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio other	12.50

Metric	Value
CQA speedup if no scalar integer	1.00
CQA speedup if FP arith vectorized	1.00
CQA speedup if fully vectorized	13.71
CQA speedup if no inter-iteration dependency	NA
CQA speedup if next bottleneck killed	1.20
Bottlenecks
Function	hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined
Source	par_strength.c:1268-1278
Source loop unroll info	not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop
Source loop unroll confidence level	max
Unroll/vectorization loop type	NA
Unroll factor	NA
CQA cycles	1.00
CQA cycles if no scalar integer	1.00
CQA cycles if FP arith vectorized	1.00
CQA cycles if fully vectorized	0.07
Front-end cycles	0.75
P0 cycles	0.83
P1 cycles	0.83
P2 cycles	0.83
P3 cycles	0.83
P4 cycles	0.83
P5 cycles	0.83
P6 cycles	0.75
P7 cycles	0.75
P8 cycles	0.75
P9 cycles	0.75
P10 cycles	0.00
P11 cycles	0.00
P12 cycles	0.00
P13 cycles	0.00
P14 cycles	0.00
P15 cycles	0.00
DIV/SQRT cycles	0.00
Inter-iter dependencies cycles	1
FE+BE cycles (UFS)	NA
Stall cycles (UFS)	NA
Nb insns	6.00
Nb uops	6.00
Nb loads	2.00
Nb stores	1.00
Nb stack references	1.00
FLOP/cycle	0.00
Nb FLOP add-sub	0.00
Nb FLOP mul	0.00
Nb FLOP fma	0.00
Nb FLOP div	0.00
Nb FLOP rcp	0.00
Nb FLOP sqrt	0.00
Nb FLOP rsqrt	0.00
Bytes/cycle	24.00
Bytes prefetched	0.00
Bytes loaded	16.00
Bytes stored	8.00
Stride 0	1.00
Stride 1	2.00
Stride n	0.00
Stride unknown	0.00
Stride indirect	0.00
Vectorization ratio all	0.00
Vectorization ratio load	0.00
Vectorization ratio store	0.00
Vectorization ratio mul	NA
Vectorization ratio add_sub	NA
Vectorization ratio fma	NA
Vectorization ratio div_sqrt	NA
Vectorization ratio other	0.00
Vector-efficiency ratio all	9.38
Vector-efficiency ratio load	12.50
Vector-efficiency ratio store	6.25
Vector-efficiency ratio mul	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio add_sub	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio fma	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio div_sqrt	NA
Vector-efficiency ratio other	12.50

Path /

Average path: Display a virtual path defined by average values of all real paths

Function	hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined
Source file and lines	par_strength.c:1268-1278
Module	exec

The loop is defined in /home/eoseret/qaas_runs_ZEN5/173-989-6379/intel/AMG/build/AMG/AMG/parcsr_ls/par_strength.c:1268-1278.

The related source loop is not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop.
The structure of this loop is probably <if then [else] end>.

The presence of multiple execution paths is typically the main/first bottleneck.
Try to simplify control inside loop: ideally, try to remove all conditional expressions, for example by (if applicable):

hoisting them (moving them outside the loop)
turning them into conditional moves, MIN or MAX

Ex: if (x<0) x=0 => x = (x<0 ? 0 : x) (or MAX(0,x) after defining the corresponding macro)

gain
potential
hint
expert

Vectorization

Your loop is not vectorized. Only 10% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions). By vectorizing your loop, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 1.38 to 0.15 cycles (9.43x speedup).

Details

All SSE/AVX instructions are used in scalar version (process only one data element in vector registers). Since your execution units are vector units, only a vectorized loop can use their full power.

Workaround

Try another compiler or update/tune your current one:
- recompile with ffast-math (included in Ofast) to extend loop vectorization to FP reductions.
Remove inter-iterations dependences from your loop and make it unit-stride:
- If your arrays have 2 or more dimensions, check whether elements are accessed contiguously and, otherwise, try to permute loops accordingly: C storage order is row-major: for(i) for(j) a[j][i] = b[j][i]; (slow, non stride 1) => for(i) for(j) a[i][j] = b[i][j]; (fast, stride 1)
- If your loop streams arrays of structures (AoS), try to use structures of arrays instead (SoA): for(i) a[i].x = b[i].x; (slow, non stride 1) => for(i) a.x[i] = b.x[i]; (fast, stride 1)

No data for this section

Slow data structures access

Detected data structures (typically arrays) that cannot be efficiently read/written

Details

Irregular (variable stride) or indirect: 0 occurrence(s)

Non-unit stride (uncontiguous) accesses are not efficiently using data caches

Workaround

Try to remove indirect accesses. If applicable, precompute elements out of the innermost loop.

Type of elements and instruction set

No instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on FP elements. This loop is probably writing/copying data or processing integer elements.

Matching between your loop (in the source code) and the binary loop

The binary loop does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary loop is loading 28 bytes. The binary loop is storing 16 bytes.

Unroll opportunity

Loop is data access bound.

Workaround

Unroll your loop if trip count is significantly higher than target unroll factor and if some data references are common to consecutive iterations. This can be done manually. Or with the unroll (resp. unroll_and_jam) directive on top of the inner (resp. surrounding) loop. You can enforce an unroll factor: #pragma unroll_and_jam N, unroll_and_jam(N), unroll N or unroll(N)

General properties

nb instructions	8
nb uops	7.50
loop length	30
used x86 registers	5
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	0
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	1.50

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE

micro-operation queue	0.94 cycles
front end	0.94 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	1.25	1.25	1.25	1.25	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
cycles	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	1.25	1.25	1.25	1.25	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00

Execution ports to units layout:

P0: ALU
P1: ALU
P2: ALU
P3: ALU, BRU
P4: ALU, BRU
P5: ALU, BRU
P6 (512 bits): store address, load
P7 (512 bits): store address, load
P8 (512 bits): store address, load
P9 (512 bits): store address, load
P10 (512 bits): VPU, DIV/SQRT
P11 (512 bits): VPU, DIV/SQRT
P12 (512 bits): VPU
P13 (512 bits): VPU
P14 (512 bits): FP store data
P15 (512 bits): FP store data

Cycles executing div or sqrt instructions	NA
Longest recurrence chain latency (RecMII)	1.00

Cycles summary

Front-end	0.94
Dispatch	1.29
Data deps.	1.00
Overall L1	1.38

Vectorization ratios

all	0%
load	0%
store	0%
mul	NA (no mul vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
add-sub	NA (no add-sub vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
fma	NA (no fma vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
div/sqrt	NA (no div/sqrt vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
other	0%

Vector efficiency ratios

all	10%
load	12%
store	9%
mul	NA (no mul vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
add-sub	NA (no add-sub vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
fma	NA (no fma vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
div/sqrt	NA (no div/sqrt vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
other	12%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each iteration of the binary loop takes 1.38 cycles. At this rate:

7% of peak load performance is reached (19.43 out of 256.00 bytes loaded per cycle (GB/s @ 1GHz))
8% of peak store performance is reached (10.86 out of 128.00 bytes stored per cycle (GB/s @ 1GHz))

Function	hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined
Source file and lines	par_strength.c:1268-1278
Module	exec

The loop is defined in /home/eoseret/qaas_runs_ZEN5/173-989-6379/intel/AMG/build/AMG/AMG/parcsr_ls/par_strength.c:1268-1278.

The related source loop is not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop.
The structure of this loop is probably <if then [else] end>.

The presence of multiple execution paths is typically the main/first bottleneck.
Try to simplify control inside loop: ideally, try to remove all conditional expressions, for example by (if applicable):

hoisting them (moving them outside the loop)
turning them into conditional moves, MIN or MAX

Ex: if (x<0) x=0 => x = (x<0 ? 0 : x) (or MAX(0,x) after defining the corresponding macro)

gain
potential
hint
expert

Vectorization

Your loop is not vectorized. 8 data elements could be processed at once in vector registers. By vectorizing your loop, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 1.75 to 0.22 cycles (8.00x speedup).

Details

All SSE/AVX instructions are used in scalar version (process only one data element in vector registers). Since your execution units are vector units, only a vectorized loop can use their full power.

Workaround

Try another compiler or update/tune your current one:
- recompile with ffast-math (included in Ofast) to extend loop vectorization to FP reductions.
Remove inter-iterations dependences from your loop and make it unit-stride:
- If your arrays have 2 or more dimensions, check whether elements are accessed contiguously and, otherwise, try to permute loops accordingly: C storage order is row-major: for(i) for(j) a[j][i] = b[j][i]; (slow, non stride 1) => for(i) for(j) a[i][j] = b[i][j]; (fast, stride 1)
- If your loop streams arrays of structures (AoS), try to use structures of arrays instead (SoA): for(i) a[i].x = b[i].x; (slow, non stride 1) => for(i) a.x[i] = b.x[i]; (fast, stride 1)

Execution units bottlenecks

Performance is limited by:

reading data from caches/RAM (load units are a bottleneck)
writing data to caches/RAM (the store unit is a bottleneck)

By removing all these bottlenecks, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 1.75 to 1.13 cycles (1.56x speedup).

Workaround

Read less array elements
Write less array elements
Provide more information to your compiler:
- hardcode the bounds of the corresponding 'for' loop
- use the 'restrict' C99 keyword

No data for this section

Slow data structures access

Detected data structures (typically arrays) that cannot be efficiently read/written

Details

Irregular (variable stride) or indirect: 1 occurrence(s)

Non-unit stride (uncontiguous) accesses are not efficiently using data caches

Workaround

Try to remove indirect accesses. If applicable, precompute elements out of the innermost loop.

Type of elements and instruction set

No instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on FP elements. This loop is probably writing/copying data or processing integer elements.

Matching between your loop (in the source code) and the binary loop

The binary loop does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary loop is loading 40 bytes. The binary loop is storing 24 bytes.

Unroll opportunity

Loop is data access bound.

Workaround

Unroll your loop if trip count is significantly higher than target unroll factor and if some data references are common to consecutive iterations. This can be done manually. Or with the unroll (resp. unroll_and_jam) directive on top of the inner (resp. surrounding) loop. You can enforce an unroll factor: #pragma unroll_and_jam N, unroll_and_jam(N), unroll N or unroll(N)

General properties

nb instructions	10
nb uops	9
loop length	36
used x86 registers	6
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	0
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	2

Front-end

ASSUMED MACRO FUSION FIT IN UOP CACHE

micro-operation queue	1.13 cycles
front end	1.13 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	1.75	1.75	1.75	1.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
cycles	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	1.75	1.75	1.75	1.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00

Execution ports to units layout:

P0: ALU
P1: ALU
P2: ALU
P3: ALU, BRU
P4: ALU, BRU
P5: ALU, BRU
P6 (512 bits): store address, load
P7 (512 bits): store address, load
P8 (512 bits): store address, load
P9 (512 bits): store address, load
P10 (512 bits): VPU, DIV/SQRT
P11 (512 bits): VPU, DIV/SQRT
P12 (512 bits): VPU
P13 (512 bits): VPU
P14 (512 bits): FP store data
P15 (512 bits): FP store data

Cycles executing div or sqrt instructions	NA
Longest recurrence chain latency (RecMII)	1.00

Cycles summary

Front-end	1.13
Dispatch	1.75
Data deps.	1.00
Overall L1	1.75

Vectorization ratios

all	0%
load	0%
store	0%
mul	NA (no mul vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
add-sub	NA (no add-sub vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
fma	NA (no fma vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
div/sqrt	NA (no div/sqrt vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
other	0%

Vector efficiency ratios

all	12%
load	12%
store	12%
mul	NA (no mul vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
add-sub	NA (no add-sub vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
fma	NA (no fma vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
div/sqrt	NA (no div/sqrt vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
other	12%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each iteration of the binary loop takes 1.75 cycles. At this rate:

8% of peak load performance is reached (22.86 out of 256.00 bytes loaded per cycle (GB/s @ 1GHz))
10% of peak store performance is reached (13.71 out of 128.00 bytes stored per cycle (GB/s @ 1GHz))

Front-end bottlenecks

Found no such bottlenecks.

ASM code

In the binary file, the address of the loop is: 2a5c41

Instruction	Nb FU	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	Latency	Recip. throughput	Vectorization
CMPQ $0,(%RCX,%RAX,8)	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	1	0.25	scal (12.5%)
JLE 2a5c30 <hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined+0x90>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
MOV -0x20(%RBP),%RDI	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	3	0.25	N/A
MOV %RDI,(%RDX,%RAX,8)	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	4	0.50	scal (12.5%)
MOV -0x20(%RBP),%RDI	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	3	0.25	N/A
MOV %RAX,(%RSI,%RDI,8)	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	4	0.50	scal (12.5%)
INCQ -0x20(%RBP)	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	1	0.50	scal (12.5%)
INC %RAX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	N/A
CMP %RAX,-0x28(%RBP)	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	1	0.25	N/A
JG 2a5c41 <hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined+0xa1>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A

Function	hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined
Source file and lines	par_strength.c:1268-1278
Module	exec

The loop is defined in /home/eoseret/qaas_runs_ZEN5/173-989-6379/intel/AMG/build/AMG/AMG/parcsr_ls/par_strength.c:1268-1278.

The related source loop is not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop.
The structure of this loop is probably <if then [else] end>.

The presence of multiple execution paths is typically the main/first bottleneck.
Try to simplify control inside loop: ideally, try to remove all conditional expressions, for example by (if applicable):

hoisting them (moving them outside the loop)
turning them into conditional moves, MIN or MAX

Ex: if (x<0) x=0 => x = (x<0 ? 0 : x) (or MAX(0,x) after defining the corresponding macro)

gain
potential
hint
expert

Vectorization

Your loop is not vectorized. Only 9% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions). By vectorizing your loop, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 1.00 to 0.07 cycles (13.71x speedup).

Details

All SSE/AVX instructions are used in scalar version (process only one data element in vector registers). Since your execution units are vector units, only a vectorized loop can use their full power.

Workaround

Try another compiler or update/tune your current one:
- recompile with ffast-math (included in Ofast) to extend loop vectorization to FP reductions.
Remove inter-iterations dependences from your loop and make it unit-stride:
- If your arrays have 2 or more dimensions, check whether elements are accessed contiguously and, otherwise, try to permute loops accordingly: C storage order is row-major: for(i) for(j) a[j][i] = b[j][i]; (slow, non stride 1) => for(i) for(j) a[i][j] = b[i][j]; (fast, stride 1)
- If your loop streams arrays of structures (AoS), try to use structures of arrays instead (SoA): for(i) a[i].x = b[i].x; (slow, non stride 1) => for(i) a.x[i] = b.x[i]; (fast, stride 1)

Execution units bottlenecks

Found no such bottlenecks but see expert reports for more complex bottlenecks.

No data for this section

Type of elements and instruction set

No instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on FP elements. This loop is probably writing/copying data or processing integer elements.

Matching between your loop (in the source code) and the binary loop

The binary loop does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary loop is loading 16 bytes. The binary loop is storing 8 bytes.

Unroll opportunity

Loop body is too small to efficiently use resources.

Workaround

Unroll your loop if trip count is significantly higher than target unroll factor. This can be done manually. Or with the unroll (resp. unroll_and_jam) directive on top of the inner (resp. surrounding) loop. You can enforce an unroll factor: #pragma unroll_and_jam N, unroll_and_jam(N), unroll N or unroll(N)

General properties

nb instructions	6
nb uops	6
loop length	24
used x86 registers	4
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	0
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	1

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE FIT IN UOP CACHE

micro-operation queue	0.75 cycles
front end	0.75 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
cycles	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.83	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00

Execution ports to units layout:

P0: ALU
P1: ALU
P2: ALU
P3: ALU, BRU
P4: ALU, BRU
P5: ALU, BRU
P6 (512 bits): store address, load
P7 (512 bits): store address, load
P8 (512 bits): store address, load
P9 (512 bits): store address, load
P10 (512 bits): VPU, DIV/SQRT
P11 (512 bits): VPU, DIV/SQRT
P12 (512 bits): VPU
P13 (512 bits): VPU
P14 (512 bits): FP store data
P15 (512 bits): FP store data

Cycles executing div or sqrt instructions	NA
Longest recurrence chain latency (RecMII)	1.00

Cycles summary

Front-end	0.75
Dispatch	0.83
Data deps.	1.00
Overall L1	1.00

Vectorization ratios

all	0%
load	0%
store	0%
mul	NA (no mul vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
add-sub	NA (no add-sub vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
fma	NA (no fma vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
div/sqrt	NA (no div/sqrt vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
other	0%

Vector efficiency ratios

all	9%
load	12%
store	6%
mul	NA (no mul vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
add-sub	NA (no add-sub vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
fma	NA (no fma vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
div/sqrt	NA (no div/sqrt vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
other	12%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each iteration of the binary loop takes 1.00 cycles. At this rate:

6% of peak load performance is reached (16.00 out of 256.00 bytes loaded per cycle (GB/s @ 1GHz))
6% of peak store performance is reached (8.00 out of 128.00 bytes stored per cycle (GB/s @ 1GHz))

Front-end bottlenecks

Found no such bottlenecks.

ASM code

In the binary file, the address of the loop is: 2a5c41

Instruction	Nb FU	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	Latency	Recip. throughput	Vectorization
MOVQ $-0x1,(%RDX,%RAX,8)	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	4	0.50	scal (6.3%)
INC %RAX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	N/A
CMP %RAX,-0x28(%RBP)	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	1	0.25	scal (12.5%)
JLE 2a5c65 <hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined+0xc5>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
CMPQ $0,(%RCX,%RAX,8)	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	1	0.25	N/A
JLE 2a5c30 <hypre_BoomerAMGCreate2ndS.omp_outlined+0x90>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A

Report Configuration

Vectorization

Details

Workaround

Slow data structures access

Details

Workaround

Type of elements and instruction set

Matching between your loop (in the source code) and the binary loop

Unroll opportunity

Workaround

General properties

Front-end

Back-end

Cycles summary

Vectorization ratios

Vector efficiency ratios

Cycles and memory resources usage

Vectorization

Details

Workaround

Execution units bottlenecks

Workaround

Slow data structures access

Details

Workaround

Type of elements and instruction set

Matching between your loop (in the source code) and the binary loop

Unroll opportunity

Workaround

General properties

Front-end

Back-end

Cycles summary

Vectorization ratios

Vector efficiency ratios

Cycles and memory resources usage

Front-end bottlenecks

ASM code

Vectorization

Details

Workaround

Execution units bottlenecks

Type of elements and instruction set

Matching between your loop (in the source code) and the binary loop

Unroll opportunity

Workaround

General properties

Front-end

Back-end

Cycles summary

Vectorization ratios

Vector efficiency ratios

Cycles and memory resources usage

Front-end bottlenecks

ASM code