OV - exec - Function __svml_i64div2

  ***  This Panel is Intentionally Left Blank.  ***

It is due to a lack of debug symbols in the given object
(loop or function).

0x4593b0 ENDBR64

0x4593b4 VMOVQ	%XMM0,%RAX

0x4593b9 VMOVQ	%XMM1,%RCX

0x4593be MOV	%RAX,%RDX

0x4593c1 OR	%RCX,%RDX

0x4593c4 SHR	$0x20,%RDX

0x4593c8 JE	4593d4

0x4593ca CQTO

0x4593cc IDIV	%RCX

0x4593cf MOV	%RAX,%RCX

0x4593d2 JMP	4593da

0x4593d4 XOR	%EDX,%EDX

0x4593d6 DIV	%ECX

0x4593d8 MOV	%EAX,%ECX

0x4593da VPEXTRQ	$0x1,%XMM0,%RAX

0x4593e0 VPEXTRQ	$0x1,%XMM1,%R8

0x4593e6 VMOVQ	%RCX,%XMM0

0x4593eb MOV	%RAX,%RCX

0x4593ee OR	%R8,%RCX

0x4593f1 SHR	$0x20,%RCX

0x4593f5 JE	459403

0x4593f7 CQTO

0x4593f9 IDIV	%R8

0x4593fc VPINSRQ	$0x1,%RAX,%XMM0,%XMM0

0x459402 RET

0x459403 XOR	%EDX,%EDX

0x459405 DIV	%R8D

0x459408 VPINSRQ	$0x1,%RAX,%XMM0,%XMM0

0x45940e RET

0x45940f NOP

Coverage (%)	Name	Module
►28.33+	__svml_i64div2	exec
○	build_field(global_variables&)[...]	exec
○	__kmp_invoke_microtask	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_launch_thread	libiomp5.so
○	_INTERNALea951ae6::__kmp_launc[...]	libiomp5.so
○	start_thread	libc.so.6
○	__GI___clone3	libc.so.6
►20.90+	__svml_i64div2	exec
○	build_field(global_variables&)[...]	exec
○	__kmp_invoke_microtask	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_launch_thread	libiomp5.so
○	_INTERNALea951ae6::__kmp_launc[...]	libiomp5.so
○	start_thread	libc.so.6
○	__GI___clone3	libc.so.6
►16.56+	__svml_i64div2	exec
○	generate_chunk(int, global_var[...]	exec
○	__kmp_invoke_microtask	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_launch_thread	libiomp5.so
○	_INTERNALea951ae6::__kmp_launc[...]	libiomp5.so
○	start_thread	libc.so.6
○	__GI___clone3	libc.so.6
►14.86+	__svml_i64div2	exec
○	build_field(global_variables&)[...]	exec
○	__kmp_invoke_microtask	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_launch_thread	libiomp5.so
○	_INTERNALea951ae6::__kmp_launc[...]	libiomp5.so
○	start_thread	libc.so.6
○	__GI___clone3	libc.so.6
►7.59+	__svml_i64div2	exec
○	generate_chunk(int, global_var[...]	exec
○	__kmp_invoke_microtask	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_launch_thread	libiomp5.so
○	_INTERNALea951ae6::__kmp_launc[...]	libiomp5.so
○	start_thread	libc.so.6
○	__GI___clone3	libc.so.6
►4.03+	__svml_i64div2	exec
○	build_field(global_variables&)[...]	exec
○	__kmp_invoke_microtask	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_launch_thread	libiomp5.so
○	_INTERNALea951ae6::__kmp_launc[...]	libiomp5.so
○	start_thread	libc.so.6
○	__GI___clone3	libc.so.6
►3.25+	__svml_i64div2	exec
○	build_field(global_variables&)[...]	exec
○	__kmp_invoke_microtask	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_launch_thread	libiomp5.so
○	_INTERNALea951ae6::__kmp_launc[...]	libiomp5.so
○	start_thread	libc.so.6
○	__GI___clone3	libc.so.6
►1.08+	__svml_i64div2	exec
○	build_field(global_variables&)[...]	exec
○	__kmp_invoke_microtask	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_invoke_task_func	libiomp5.so
○	__kmp_launch_thread	libiomp5.so
○	_INTERNALea951ae6::__kmp_launc[...]	libiomp5.so
○	start_thread	libc.so.6
○	__GI___clone3	libc.so.6

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 /

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

The code analyzed by CQA in that panel excludes loops and represents 0.03% of application time for run icx_0

Source file and lines
Module	exec

This function has 4 execution paths.

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

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

gain
potential
hint
expert

Vectorization

Your function is not vectorized. Only 11% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions). By vectorizing your function, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 1.87 cycles (9.60x 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 function can use their full power.

Workaround

Try another compiler or update/tune your current one
Make array accesses unit-stride:
- If your function streams arrays of structures (AoS), try to use structures of arrays instead (SoA)

Expensive FP math instructions/calls

Detected performance impact from expensive FP math instructions/calls. By removing/reexpressing them, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 2.81 cycles (6.40x speedup).

Complex instructions

Detected COMPLEX INSTRUCTIONS.

Details

These instructions generate more than one micro-operation and only one of them can be decoded during a cycle and the extra micro-operations increase pressure on execution units.

IDIV: 0 occurrences
VPEXTRQ: 0 occurrences
VPINSRQ: 0 occurrences

Conversion instructions

Detected expensive conversion instructions.

Details

CQTO: 0 occurrences

Workaround

Avoid mixing data with different types. In particular, check if the type of constants is the same as array elements.

Type of elements and instruction set

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

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

The binary function does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary function does not load or store any data.

General properties

nb instructions	21.50
nb uops	24.50
loop length	75
used x86 registers	4
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	2
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	0

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE

micro-operation queue	3.06 cycles
front end	3.06 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	2.83	2.67	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00
cycles	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	2.83	2.67	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00

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

13.00-18.00

Cycles summary

Front-end	3.06
Dispatch	4.00
DIV/SQRT	13.00-18.00
Overall L1	13.00-18.00

Vectorization ratios

all	0%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	0%
other	0%

Vector efficiency ratios

all	11%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	9%
other	11%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each call to the function takes 18.00 cycles.

The code analyzed by CQA in that panel excludes loops and represents 0.03% of application time for run icx_0

Source file and lines
Module	exec

This function has 4 execution paths.

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

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

gain
potential
hint
expert

Code clean check

Detected a slowdown caused by scalar integer instructions (typically used for address computation). By removing them, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 24.00 to 2.00 cycles (12.00x speedup).

Workaround

Try to reorganize arrays of structures to structures of arrays
Consider to permute loops (see vectorization gain report)

Vectorization

Your function is not vectorized. 8 data elements could be processed at once in vector registers. By vectorizing your function, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 24.00 to 3.00 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 function can use their full power.

Workaround

Try another compiler or update/tune your current one
Make array accesses unit-stride:
- If your function streams arrays of structures (AoS), try to use structures of arrays instead (SoA)

Execution units bottlenecks

Performance is limited by execution of divide and square root operations (the divide/square root unit is a bottleneck). By removing all these bottlenecks, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 24.00 to 4.00 cycles (6.00x speedup).

Workaround

Reduce the number of division or square root instructions:

If denominator is constant over iterations, use reciprocal (replace x/y with x*(1/y)). Check precision impact.

Expensive FP math instructions/calls

Detected performance impact from expensive FP math instructions/calls. By removing/reexpressing them, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 24.00 to 2.75 cycles (8.73x speedup).

Complex instructions

Detected COMPLEX INSTRUCTIONS.

Details

These instructions generate more than one micro-operation and only one of them can be decoded during a cycle and the extra micro-operations increase pressure on execution units.

IDIV: 2 occurrences►
VPEXTRQ: 2 occurrences►
VPINSRQ: 1 occurrences►

Conversion instructions

Detected expensive conversion instructions.

Details

CQTO: 2 occurrences►

Workaround

Avoid mixing data with different types. In particular, check if the type of constants is the same as array elements.

Type of elements and instruction set

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

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

The binary function does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary function does not load or store any data.

General properties

nb instructions	22
nb uops	24
loop length	77
used x86 registers	4
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	2
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	0

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE FIT IN UOP CACHE

micro-operation queue	3.00 cycles
front end	3.00 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	3.00	3.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00
cycles	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	3.00	3.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00

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

14.00-24.00

Cycles summary

Front-end	3.00
Dispatch	4.00
DIV/SQRT	14.00-24.00
Overall L1	14.00-24.00

Vectorization ratios

all	0%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	0%
other	0%

Vector efficiency ratios

all	12%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	12%
other	12%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each call to the function takes 24.00 cycles.

Front-end bottlenecks

Found no such bottlenecks.

ASM code

In the binary file, the address of the function is: 4593b0

Instruction	Nb FU	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15	Latency	Recip. throughput	Vectorization
ENDBR64																				N/A
VMOVQ %XMM0,%RAX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.50	0.50	1	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VMOVQ %XMM1,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.50	0.50	1	0.50	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RDX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
OR %RCX,%RDX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (12.5%)
SHR $0x20,%RDX	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.33	scal (12.5%)
JE 4593d4 <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x24>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
CQTO																				scal (12.5%)
IDIV %RCX	2	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	9-19	7-12	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
JMP 4593da <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x2a>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	N/A
VPEXTRQ $0x1,%XMM0,%RAX	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.50	0.50	6	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VPEXTRQ $0x1,%XMM1,%R8	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.50	0.50	6	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VMOVQ %RCX,%XMM0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	1	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
OR %R8,%RCX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (12.5%)
SHR $0x20,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.33	scal (12.5%)
JE 459403 <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x53>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
CQTO																				scal (12.5%)
IDIV %R8	2	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	9-19	7-12	scal (12.5%)
VPINSRQ $0x1,%RAX,%XMM0,%XMM0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0	0	1	1	scal (12.5%)
RET	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50	N/A

The code analyzed by CQA in that panel excludes loops and represents 0.03% of application time for run icx_0

Source file and lines
Module	exec

This function has 4 execution paths.

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

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

gain
potential
hint
expert

Code clean check

Detected a slowdown caused by scalar integer instructions (typically used for address computation). By removing them, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 2.00 cycles (9.00x speedup).

Workaround

Try to reorganize arrays of structures to structures of arrays
Consider to permute loops (see vectorization gain report)

Vectorization

Your function is not vectorized. Only 11% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions). By vectorizing your function, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 1.87 cycles (9.60x 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 function can use their full power.

Workaround

Try another compiler or update/tune your current one
Make array accesses unit-stride:
- If your function streams arrays of structures (AoS), try to use structures of arrays instead (SoA)

Execution units bottlenecks

Performance is limited by execution of divide and square root operations (the divide/square root unit is a bottleneck). By removing all these bottlenecks, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 4.00 cycles (4.50x speedup).

Workaround

Reduce the number of division or square root instructions:

If denominator is constant over iterations, use reciprocal (replace x/y with x*(1/y)). Check precision impact.

Expensive FP math instructions/calls

Detected performance impact from expensive FP math instructions/calls. By removing/reexpressing them, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 2.88 cycles (6.26x speedup).

Complex instructions

Detected COMPLEX INSTRUCTIONS.

Details

These instructions generate more than one micro-operation and only one of them can be decoded during a cycle and the extra micro-operations increase pressure on execution units.

DIV: 1 occurrences►
IDIV: 1 occurrences►
VPEXTRQ: 2 occurrences►
VPINSRQ: 1 occurrences►

Conversion instructions

Detected expensive conversion instructions.

Details

CQTO: 1 occurrences►

Workaround

Avoid mixing data with different types. In particular, check if the type of constants is the same as array elements.

Type of elements and instruction set

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

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

The binary function does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary function does not load or store any data.

General properties

nb instructions	22
nb uops	25
loop length	77
used x86 registers	4
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	2
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	0

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE FIT IN UOP CACHE

micro-operation queue	3.13 cycles
front end	3.13 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	3.00	3.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00
cycles	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	3.00	3.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00

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

13.00-18.00

Cycles summary

Front-end	3.13
Dispatch	4.00
DIV/SQRT	13.00-18.00
Overall L1	13.00-18.00

Vectorization ratios

all	0%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	0%
other	0%

Vector efficiency ratios

all	11%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	9%
other	12%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each call to the function takes 18.00 cycles.

Front-end bottlenecks

Found no such bottlenecks.

ASM code

In the binary file, the address of the function is: 4593b0

Instruction	Nb FU	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15	Latency	Recip. throughput	Vectorization
ENDBR64																				N/A
VMOVQ %XMM0,%RAX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.50	0.50	1	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VMOVQ %XMM1,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.50	0.50	1	0.50	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RDX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
OR %RCX,%RDX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (12.5%)
SHR $0x20,%RDX	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.33	scal (12.5%)
JE 4593d4 <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x24>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
CQTO																				scal (12.5%)
IDIV %RCX	2	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	9-19	7-12	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
JMP 4593da <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x2a>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	N/A
VPEXTRQ $0x1,%XMM0,%RAX	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.50	0.50	6	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VPEXTRQ $0x1,%XMM1,%R8	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.50	0.50	6	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VMOVQ %RCX,%XMM0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	1	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
OR %R8,%RCX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (12.5%)
SHR $0x20,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.33	scal (12.5%)
JE 459403 <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x53>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
XOR %EDX,%EDX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	scal (6.3%)
DIV %R8D	2	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10-17	6	scal (6.3%)
VPINSRQ $0x1,%RAX,%XMM0,%XMM0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0	0	1	1	scal (12.5%)
RET	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50	N/A

The code analyzed by CQA in that panel excludes loops and represents 0.03% of application time for run icx_0

Source file and lines
Module	exec

This function has 4 execution paths.

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

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

gain
potential
hint
expert

Code clean check

Detected a slowdown caused by scalar integer instructions (typically used for address computation). By removing them, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 2.00 cycles (9.00x speedup).

Workaround

Try to reorganize arrays of structures to structures of arrays
Consider to permute loops (see vectorization gain report)

Vectorization

Your function is not vectorized. Only 11% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions). By vectorizing your function, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 1.87 cycles (9.60x 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 function can use their full power.

Workaround

Try another compiler or update/tune your current one
Make array accesses unit-stride:
- If your function streams arrays of structures (AoS), try to use structures of arrays instead (SoA)

Execution units bottlenecks

Performance is limited by execution of divide and square root operations (the divide/square root unit is a bottleneck). By removing all these bottlenecks, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 4.00 cycles (4.50x speedup).

Workaround

Reduce the number of division or square root instructions:

If denominator is constant over iterations, use reciprocal (replace x/y with x*(1/y)). Check precision impact.

Expensive FP math instructions/calls

Detected performance impact from expensive FP math instructions/calls. By removing/reexpressing them, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 18.00 to 2.75 cycles (6.55x speedup).

Complex instructions

Detected COMPLEX INSTRUCTIONS.

Details

These instructions generate more than one micro-operation and only one of them can be decoded during a cycle and the extra micro-operations increase pressure on execution units.

DIV: 1 occurrences►
IDIV: 1 occurrences►
VPEXTRQ: 2 occurrences►
VPINSRQ: 1 occurrences►

Conversion instructions

Detected expensive conversion instructions.

Details

CQTO: 1 occurrences►

Workaround

Avoid mixing data with different types. In particular, check if the type of constants is the same as array elements.

Type of elements and instruction set

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

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

The binary function does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary function does not load or store any data.

General properties

nb instructions	21
nb uops	24
loop length	73
used x86 registers	4
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	2
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	0

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE FIT IN UOP CACHE

micro-operation queue	3.00 cycles
front end	3.00 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	2.67	2.33	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00
cycles	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	2.67	2.33	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00

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

13.00-18.00

Cycles summary

Front-end	3.00
Dispatch	4.00
DIV/SQRT	13.00-18.00
Overall L1	13.00-18.00

Vectorization ratios

all	0%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	0%
other	0%

Vector efficiency ratios

all	11%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	9%
other	11%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each call to the function takes 18.00 cycles.

Front-end bottlenecks

Found no such bottlenecks.

ASM code

In the binary file, the address of the function is: 4593b0

Instruction	Nb FU	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15	Latency	Recip. throughput	Vectorization
ENDBR64																				N/A
VMOVQ %XMM0,%RAX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.50	0.50	1	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VMOVQ %XMM1,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.50	0.50	1	0.50	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RDX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
OR %RCX,%RDX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (12.5%)
SHR $0x20,%RDX	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.33	scal (12.5%)
JE 4593d4 <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x24>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
XOR %EDX,%EDX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	scal (6.3%)
DIV %ECX	2	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10-17	6	scal (6.3%)
MOV %EAX,%ECX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (6.3%)
VPEXTRQ $0x1,%XMM0,%RAX	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.50	0.50	6	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VPEXTRQ $0x1,%XMM1,%R8	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.50	0.50	6	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VMOVQ %RCX,%XMM0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	1	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
OR %R8,%RCX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (12.5%)
SHR $0x20,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.33	scal (12.5%)
JE 459403 <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x53>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
CQTO																				scal (12.5%)
IDIV %R8	2	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	9-19	7-12	scal (12.5%)
VPINSRQ $0x1,%RAX,%XMM0,%XMM0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0	0	1	1	scal (12.5%)
RET	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50	N/A

The code analyzed by CQA in that panel excludes loops and represents 0.03% of application time for run icx_0

Source file and lines
Module	exec

This function has 4 execution paths.

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

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

gain
potential
hint
expert

Code clean check

Detected a slowdown caused by scalar integer instructions (typically used for address computation). By removing them, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 12.00 to 2.00 cycles (6.00x speedup).

Workaround

Try to reorganize arrays of structures to structures of arrays
Consider to permute loops (see vectorization gain report)

Vectorization

Your function is not vectorized. Only 10% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions). By vectorizing your function, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 12.00 to 0.75 cycles (16.00x 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 function can use their full power.

Workaround

Try another compiler or update/tune your current one
Make array accesses unit-stride:
- If your function streams arrays of structures (AoS), try to use structures of arrays instead (SoA)

Execution units bottlenecks

Performance is limited by execution of divide and square root operations (the divide/square root unit is a bottleneck). By removing all these bottlenecks, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 12.00 to 4.00 cycles (3.00x speedup).

Workaround

Reduce the number of division or square root instructions:

If denominator is constant over iterations, use reciprocal (replace x/y with x*(1/y)). Check precision impact.

Expensive FP math instructions/calls

Detected performance impact from expensive FP math instructions/calls. By removing/reexpressing them, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 12.00 to 2.88 cycles (4.17x speedup).

Complex instructions

Detected COMPLEX INSTRUCTIONS.

Details

These instructions generate more than one micro-operation and only one of them can be decoded during a cycle and the extra micro-operations increase pressure on execution units.

DIV: 2 occurrences►
VPEXTRQ: 2 occurrences►
VPINSRQ: 1 occurrences►

Type of elements and instruction set

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

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

The binary function does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary function does not load or store any data.

General properties

nb instructions	21
nb uops	25
loop length	73
used x86 registers	4
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	2
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	0

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE FIT IN UOP CACHE

micro-operation queue	3.13 cycles
front end	3.13 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	2.67	2.33	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00
cycles	1.00	1.00	1.00	4.00	2.67	2.33	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	2.00	2.00

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

12.00

Cycles summary

Front-end	3.13
Dispatch	4.00
DIV/SQRT	12.00
Overall L1	12.00

Vectorization ratios

all	0%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	0%
other	0%

Vector efficiency ratios

all	10%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
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	6%
other	11%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each call to the function takes 12.00 cycles.

Front-end bottlenecks

Found no such bottlenecks.

ASM code

In the binary file, the address of the function is: 4593b0

Instruction	Nb FU	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15	Latency	Recip. throughput	Vectorization
ENDBR64																				N/A
VMOVQ %XMM0,%RAX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.50	0.50	1	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VMOVQ %XMM1,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.50	0.50	1	0.50	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RDX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
OR %RCX,%RDX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (12.5%)
SHR $0x20,%RDX	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.33	scal (12.5%)
JE 4593d4 <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x24>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
XOR %EDX,%EDX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	scal (6.3%)
DIV %ECX	2	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10-17	6	scal (6.3%)
MOV %EAX,%ECX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (6.3%)
VPEXTRQ $0x1,%XMM0,%RAX	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.50	0.50	6	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VPEXTRQ $0x1,%XMM1,%R8	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.50	0.50	6	0.50	scal (12.5%)
VMOVQ %RCX,%XMM0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	1	scal (12.5%)
MOV %RAX,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
OR %R8,%RCX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (12.5%)
SHR $0x20,%RCX	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.33	scal (12.5%)
JE 459403 <__svml_i64div2_e9+0x53>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50-1	N/A
XOR %EDX,%EDX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	scal (6.3%)
DIV %R8D	2	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10-17	6	scal (6.3%)
VPINSRQ $0x1,%RAX,%XMM0,%XMM0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0	0	1	1	scal (12.5%)
RET	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50	N/A

Name	Coverage (%)	Time (s)
○__svml_i64div2_e9	0.03	0.01

Report Configuration

Vectorization

Details

Workaround

Expensive FP math instructions/calls

Complex instructions

Details

Conversion instructions

Details

Workaround

Type of elements and instruction set

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

General properties

Front-end

Back-end

Cycles summary

Vectorization ratios

Vector efficiency ratios

Cycles and memory resources usage

Code clean check

Workaround

Vectorization

Details

Workaround

Execution units bottlenecks

Workaround

Expensive FP math instructions/calls

Complex instructions

Details

Conversion instructions

Details

Workaround

Type of elements and instruction set

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

General properties

Front-end

Back-end

Cycles summary

Vectorization ratios

Vector efficiency ratios

Cycles and memory resources usage

Front-end bottlenecks

ASM code

Code clean check

Workaround

Vectorization

Details

Workaround

Execution units bottlenecks

Workaround

Expensive FP math instructions/calls

Complex instructions

Details

Conversion instructions

Details

Workaround

Type of elements and instruction set

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

General properties

Front-end

Back-end

Cycles summary

Vectorization ratios

Vector efficiency ratios

Cycles and memory resources usage

Front-end bottlenecks

ASM code

Code clean check

Workaround

Vectorization

Details

Workaround

Execution units bottlenecks

Workaround

Expensive FP math instructions/calls

Complex instructions

Details

Conversion instructions

Details

Workaround