	*************************************************
	*                                               *
	*          ONE-View report generation           *
	*                                               *
	*************************************************

[MAQAO] Info: Experiment configuration summary is available adding -dbg=1 in command line

* [MAQAO] Warning: Experiment directory /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/run/oneview_runs/compilers/icx_7/oneview_results_1786617349 already exists and is reused.
           It can be replaced using --replace in the command line.
[MAQAO] Info: 
[MAQAO] Info: START THE APPLICATION PROFILING
[MAQAO] Info: -> RUNNING THE PROFILER...
[MAQAO] Info:   LPROF has already been run
[MAQAO] Info: STOP THE APPLICATION PROFILING
[MAQAO] Info: 
[MAQAO] Info: START FUNCTIONS AND LOOPS ANALYSIS ...
[MAQAO] Info: STOP FUNCTIONS AND LOOPS ANALYSIS ...
[MAQAO] Info: 
[MAQAO] Info: START THE REPORT GENERATION
[MAQAO] Info: -> ONE-VIEW EXPERIMENT DIRECTORY: /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/run/oneview_runs/compilers/icx_7/oneview_results_1786617349


+====================================================================================================================+
+                                                    1  -  GLOBAL                                                    +
+====================================================================================================================+


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                             1.1  -  Experiment Summary                                             +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

  Application:			/beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/run/binaries/icx_7/exec
  Timestamp:			2026-08-13 12:35:49
  Universal Timestamp:		1786617349
  Experiment Type:		MPI; OpenMP; Throughput; 
  Machine:			isix06.benchmarkcenter.megware.com
  Architecture:			x86_64
  Micro Architecture:		GRANITE_RAPIDS
  Model Name:			Intel(R) Xeon(R) 6972P
  Cache Size:			491520 KB
  Number of Cores:		96
  OS Version:			Linux 5.14.0-687.31.1.el9_8.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Sat Aug 1 05:38:01 EDT 2026
  Compilation Options:		
		exec: Intel(R) Fortran 26.0-1156 
  Number of processes observed:	6
  Number of threads observed:	192
  MAQAO version:		2026.1.0
  MAQAO build:			6d1be1d51c1e63266254997eb301734a7264775d::20260810-150026




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                               1.2  -  Global Metrics                                               +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

  Total Time:				49.40 s
  Max (Thread Active Time):		43.37 s
  Average Active Time:			37.79 s
  Activity Ratio:			99.4 %
  Average number of active threads:	146.858
  Affinity Stability:			99.4 %
  Time spent in analyzed loops:		94.9 %
  Time spent in analyzed innermost loops: 94.7 %
  Time spent in user code:		94.9 %
  Compilation Options Score:		16.67
  Array Access Efficiency:		99.7 %

   Potential Speedups
  ----------------------------------------------------
  Perfect Flow Complexity:		1.05
  Perfect OpenMP/MPI/Pthread/TBB:	1.11
  Perfect OpenMP/MPI/Pthread/TBB + Load Distribution:	1.20
  If No Scalar Integer:
      Potential Speedup:		1.01
      Nb Loops to get 80%:		2
  If FP Vectorized:
      Potential Speedup:		1.05
      Nb Loops to get 80%:		2
  If Fully Vectorized:
      Potential Speedup:		1.05
      Nb Loops to get 80%:		2
  If Only FP Arithmetic:
      Potential Speedup:		1.06
      Nb Loops to get 80%:		5




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                             1.3  -  Potential Speedups                                             +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

  If No Scalar Integer:
      Number of loops   | 1      | 9      | 19     | 27     | 37     | 
      Cumulated Speedup | 1.0052 | 1.0103 | 1.0103 | 1.0103 | 1.0103 | 
  Top 5 loops:
    exec - 127:	1.0052
    exec - 89:	1.0101
    exec - 259:	1.0102
    exec - 263:	1.0102
    exec - 261:	1.0103

  If FP Vectorized:
      Number of loops   | 1      | 9      | 19     | 27     | 37     | 
      Cumulated Speedup | 1.0241 | 1.0482 | 1.0482 | 1.0482 | 1.0482 | 
  Top 5 loops:
    exec - 89:	1.0241
    exec - 127:	1.0482
    exec - 93:	1.0482
    exec - 91:	1.0482
    exec - 79:	1.0482

  If Fully Vectorized:
      Number of loops   | 1      | 9      | 19     | 27     | 37     | 
      Cumulated Speedup | 1.0241 | 1.0485 | 1.0485 | 1.0485 | 1.0485 | 
  Top 5 loops:
    exec - 89:	1.0241
    exec - 127:	1.0482
    exec - 259:	1.0483
    exec - 263:	1.0484
    exec - 261:	1.0485

  If Only FP Arithmetic:
      Number of loops   | 1      | 9      | 19     | 27     | 37     | 
      Cumulated Speedup | 1.0158 | 1.0601 | 1.0606 | 1.0606 | 1.0606 | 
  Top 5 loops:
    exec - 127:	1.0158
    exec - 89:	1.0278
    exec - 135:	1.0368
    exec - 137:	1.0458
    exec - 91:	1.0504



+====================================================================================================================+
+                                                   2  -  SUMMARY                                                    +
+====================================================================================================================+


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                             2.1  -  EXPERIMENT QUALITY                                             +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

  [4 / 4] Application profile is long enough (43.37 s)
To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds.

  [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.

  [0 / 3] Architecture specific options are unknown for some functions (compilation options info are not available)
Architecture specific options are needed to produce efficient code for a specific processor ( -march=(target) ).
Architecture specific options are needed to produce efficient code for a specific processor ( -x(target), -ax(target)
or -march=(target)).

  [0 / 3] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation options informations
Functions without compilation options information cumulate 95.01% of the time spent in analyzed modules. For exec,
check that both -g and -grecord-gcc-switches are present. Remark: if such options are 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.

  [0 / 3] Optimization level is unknown for some functions (compilation options info are not available)
To have better performances, it is advised to help the compiler by using a proper optimization level (-O2 of higher).
Warning, depending on compilers, faster optimization levels can decrease numeric accuracy.

  [3 / 3] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics.


  [2 / 2] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 0.14 % 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

  [1 / 1] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated.



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                                2.2  -  CODE QUALITY                                                +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

  [4 / 4] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (94.89%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on
application performances.

  [3 / 4] A significant amount of threads are idle (23.51%)
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] CPU activity is good
CPU cores are active 99.41% of time

  [4 / 4] Loop profile is not flat
At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (6.26%), representing an hotspot for the application

  [4 / 4] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (94.72%)
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] Affinity is good (99.38%)
Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned

  [3 / 3] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS1 operations
It could be more efficient to inline by hand BLAS1 operations

  [0 / 3] Too many functions do not use all threads
Functions running on a reduced number of threads (typically sequential code) cover at least 10% of application
walltime (14.62%). Check both "Max Inclusive Time Over Threads" and "Nb Threads" in Functions or Loops tabs and
consider parallelizing sequential regions or improving parallelization of regions running on a reduced number of
threads

  [3 / 3] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (0.16%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (94.72%)
Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop
optimization more complex

  [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 Libm/SVML (special functions)



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                               2.3  -  LOOPS OVERVIEW                                               +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

  Top 5 loops:
   + exec - 61  :
     analysis: Execution Time: 6 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 %
     Loop Computation Issues: 8
        [8] [SA] Presence of expensive FP instructions - Perform hoisting, change algorithm, use SVML or proper
            numerical library or perform value profiling (count the number of distinct input values). There are 2
            issues (= instructions) costing 4 points each.
     Data Access Issues: 2
        [2] [SA] More than 20% of the loads are accessing the stack - Perform loop splitting to decrease pressure on
            registers. This issue costs 2 points.

   + exec - 220 :
     analysis: Execution Time: 5 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 %
     Loop Computation Issues: 12
        [8] [SA] Presence of expensive FP instructions - Perform hoisting, change algorithm, use SVML or proper
            numerical library or perform value profiling (count the number of distinct input values). There are 2
            issues (= instructions) costing 4 points each.
        [4] [SA] Less than 10% of the FP ADD/SUB/MUL arithmetic operations are performed using FMA - Reorganize
            arithmetic expressions to exhibit potential for FMA. This issue costs 4 points.

   + exec - 59  :
     analysis: Execution Time: 5 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 %
     Loop Computation Issues: 8
        [8] [SA] Presence of expensive FP instructions - Perform hoisting, change algorithm, use SVML or proper
            numerical library or perform value profiling (count the number of distinct input values). There are 2
            issues (= instructions) costing 4 points each.

   + exec - 67  :
     analysis: Execution Time: 5 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 %
     Loop Computation Issues: 4
        [4] [SA] Presence of expensive FP instructions - Perform hoisting, change algorithm, use SVML or proper
            numerical library or perform value profiling (count the number of distinct input values). There are 1
            issues (= instructions) costing 4 points each.

   + exec - 111 :
     analysis: Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 %
     Loop Computation Issues: 4
        [4] [SA] Presence of expensive FP instructions - Perform hoisting, change algorithm, use SVML or proper
            numerical library or perform value profiling (count the number of distinct input values). There are 1
            issues (= instructions) costing 4 points each.



+====================================================================================================================+
+                                                 3  -  APPLICATION                                                  +
+====================================================================================================================+


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                               3.1  -  Categorization                                               +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

   Category | IO     | Exe    | System  | Others  | Memory | String | MPI   | TBB   | OMP   | Pthread | Math  |
  ----------+--------+--------+---------+---------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+---------+-------+
   Time (%) | 0.00   | 94.89  | 0.31    | 0.14    | 0.12   | 0.00   | 0.27  | 0.00  | 4.27  | 0.00    | 0.00  |




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                          3.2  -  Function Based Profiling                                          +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

   Buckets                    | Nb Functions              | Coverage                  | Cumulated Coverage        |
  ----------------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------+
   > 8%                       | 3                         | 66.64                     | 66.64                     |
   4% to 8%                   | 5                         | 24.24                     | 90.87                     |
   2% to 4%                   | 2                         | 5.73                      | 96.60                     |
   1% to 2%                   | 1                         | 1.96                      | 98.56                     |
   0.5% to 1%                 | 0                         | 0.00                      | 98.56                     |
   0.25% to 0.5%              | 2                         | 0.57                      | 99.13                     |
   0.125% to 0.25%            | 1                         | 0.18                      | 99.31                     |
   < 0.125%                   | 113                       | 0.69                      | 100.00                    |




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                            3.3  -  Loop Based Profiling                                            +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

   Buckets                    | Nb Loops                  | Coverage                  | Cumulated Coverage        |
  ----------------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------+
   > 8%                       | 0                         | 0.00                      | 0.00                      |
   4% to 8%                   | 9                         | 43.81                     | 43.81                     |
   2% to 4%                   | 14                        | 41.39                     | 85.20                     |
   1% to 2%                   | 5                         | 7.38                      | 92.59                     |
   0.5% to 1%                 | 2                         | 1.78                      | 94.36                     |
   0.25% to 0.5%              | 1                         | 0.28                      | 94.64                     |
   0.125% to 0.25%            | 0                         | 0.00                      | 94.64                     |
   < 0.125%                   | 30                        | 0.08                      | 94.72                     |


+====================================================================================================================+
+                                                  4  -  FUNCTIONS                                                   +
+====================================================================================================================+


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                              4.1  -  Top 10 Functions                                              +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

   Function                                               | Module              | Coverage (%)   | Time (s)       |
  --------------------------------------------------------+---------------------+----------------+----------------+
   advec_mom_kernel_mod_mp_advec_mom_kernel_.DIR.OMP.P... | exec                | 35.46          | 13.40          |
   advec_cell_kernel_module_mp_advec_cell_kernel_.DIR.... | exec                | 19.42          | 7.34           |
   pdv_kernel_module_mp_pdv_kernel_.DIR.OMP.PARALLEL.2    | exec                | 11.75          | 4.44           |
   ideal_gas_kernel_module_mp_ideal_gas_kernel_.DIR.OM... | exec                | 5.55           | 2.10           |
   accelerate_kernel_module_mp_accelerate_kernel_.DIR.... | exec                | 5.33           | 2.01           |
   reset_field_kernel_module_mp_reset_field_kernel_.DI... | exec                | 5.11           | 1.93           |
   kmp_flag_64<false, true>::wait(kmp_info*, int, void*)  | libiomp5.so         | 4.13           | 1.56           |
   flux_calc_kernel_module_mp_flux_calc_kernel_.DIR.OM... | exec                | 4.12           | 1.56           |
   calc_dt_kernel_module_mp_calc_dt_kernel_.DIR.OMP.PA... | exec                | 3.18           | 1.20           |
   revert_kernel_module_mp_revert_kernel_.DIR.OMP.PARA... | exec                | 2.55           | 0.96           |


+====================================================================================================================+
+                                                    5  -  LOOPS                                                     +
+====================================================================================================================+


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                                5.1  -  Top 10 Loops                                                +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

   Loop Id        | Module              | Source Location                                        | Coverage (%)   |
  ----------------+---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+----------------+
   61             | exec                | PdV_kernel.f90:111-123,PdV_kernel.f90:131-135          | 6.26           |
   220            | exec                | ideal_gas_kernel.f90:49-55                             | 5.55           |
   59             | exec                | PdV_kernel.f90:75-87,PdV_kernel.f90:95-99              | 5.50           |
   67             | exec                | accelerate_kernel.f90:62-76                            | 5.32           |
   111            | exec                | advec_mom_kernel.f90:183-184                           | 4.33           |
   127            | exec                | advec_mom_kernel.f90:215-215,advec_mom_kernel.f90:2... | 4.33           |
   123            | exec                | advec_mom_kernel.f90:247-248                           | 4.31           |
   182            | exec                | flux_calc_kernel.f90:56-60                             | 4.11           |
   115            | exec                | advec_mom_kernel.f90:151-152,advec_mom_kernel.f90:1... | 4.11           |
   89             | exec                | advec_cell_kernel.f90:204-204,advec_cell_kernel.f90... | 3.55           |





+====================================================================================================================+
+                                                     6  -  CQA                                                      +
+====================================================================================================================+


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                                   6.1  -  Loops                                                    +
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+





      6.1.1  -  Loop 61 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/PdV_kernel.f90:111-123,131-135.

The related source loop is not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop.

      6.1.1.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

23% of peak computational performance is used (7.50 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.1.1.1  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is fully vectorized, using full register length.


Details
All SSE/AVX instructions are used in vector version (process two or more data elements in vector registers).



      6.1.1.1.2  -  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 32.00 to 15.50 cycles (2.06x 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. This will be done by your compiler with no-prec-div or Ofast
 - Check whether you really need double precision. If not, switch to single precision to speedup execution





      6.1.1.1.3  -  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 32.00 to 13.50 cycles (2.37x speedup).


      6.1.1.1.4  -  FMA
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected 24 FMA (fused multiply-add) operations.
Presence of both ADD/SUB and MUL operations.

Workaround
Try to change order in which elements are evaluated (using parentheses) in arithmetic expressions containing both ADD/SUB and MUL operations to enable your compiler to generate FMA instructions wherever possible.
For instance a + b*c is a valid FMA (MUL then ADD).
However (a+b)* c cannot be translated into an FMA (ADD then MUL).




      6.1.1.1.5  -  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.
 - VDIVPD: 2 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_1>>



      6.1.1.1.6  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

27 AVX-512 instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in vector mode (eight at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 240 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 144: addition or subtraction (24 inside FMA instructions)
 - 80: multiply (24 inside FMA instructions)
 - 16: divide
The binary loop is loading 1656 bytes (207 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 128 bytes (16 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.1.1.8  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.13 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.







      6.1.2  -  Loop 220 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/ideal_gas_kernel.f90:49-55.

The related source loop is not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop.

      6.1.2.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5% of peak computational performance is used (1.88 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.2.1.1  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is fully vectorized, using full register length.


Details
All SSE/AVX instructions are used in vector version (process two or more data elements in vector registers).



      6.1.2.1.2  -  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 34.00 to 6.00 cycles (5.67x 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. This will be done by your compiler with no-prec-div or Ofast
 - Check whether you really need double precision. If not, switch to single precision to speedup execution





      6.1.2.1.3  -  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 34.00 to 4.00 cycles (8.50x speedup).




      6.1.2.1.4  -  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.
 - VDIVPD: 1 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_1>>
 - VSQRTPD: 1 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_2>>



      6.1.2.1.5  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8 AVX-512 instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in vector mode (eight at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 64 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 48: multiply
 - 8: divide
 - 8: square root
The binary loop is loading 128 bytes (16 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 128 bytes (16 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.2.1.7  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.25 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.







      6.1.3  -  Loop 59 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/PdV_kernel.f90:75-87,95-99.

The related source loop is not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop.

      6.1.3.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

17% of peak computational performance is used (5.50 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.3.1.1  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is fully vectorized, using full register length.


Details
All SSE/AVX instructions are used in vector version (process two or more data elements in vector registers).



      6.1.3.1.2  -  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 32.00 to 11.50 cycles (2.78x 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. This will be done by your compiler with no-prec-div or Ofast
 - Check whether you really need double precision. If not, switch to single precision to speedup execution





      6.1.3.1.3  -  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 32.00 to 9.50 cycles (3.37x speedup).


      6.1.3.1.4  -  FMA
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected 24 FMA (fused multiply-add) operations.
Presence of both ADD/SUB and MUL operations.

Workaround
Try to change order in which elements are evaluated (using parentheses) in arithmetic expressions containing both ADD/SUB and MUL operations to enable your compiler to generate FMA instructions wherever possible.
For instance a + b*c is a valid FMA (MUL then ADD).
However (a+b)* c cannot be translated into an FMA (ADD then MUL).




      6.1.3.1.5  -  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.
 - VDIVPD: 2 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_1>>



      6.1.3.1.6  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

19 AVX-512 instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in vector mode (eight at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 176 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 80: addition or subtraction (24 inside FMA instructions)
 - 80: multiply (24 inside FMA instructions)
 - 16: divide
The binary loop is loading 1112 bytes (139 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 128 bytes (16 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.3.1.8  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.14 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.







      6.1.4  -  Loop 67 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/accelerate_kernel.f90:62-76.

The related source loop is not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop.

      6.1.4.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

54% of peak computational performance is used (17.50 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.4.1.1  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is fully vectorized, using full register length.


Details
All SSE/AVX instructions are used in vector version (process two or more data elements in vector registers).



      6.1.4.1.2  -  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 16.00 to 13.00 cycles (1.23x 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. This will be done by your compiler with no-prec-div or Ofast
 - Check whether you really need double precision. If not, switch to single precision to speedup execution





      6.1.4.1.3  -  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 16.00 to 12.00 cycles (1.33x speedup).


      6.1.4.1.4  -  FMA
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected 88 FMA (fused multiply-add) operations.
Presence of both ADD/SUB and MUL operations.

Workaround
Try to change order in which elements are evaluated (using parentheses) in arithmetic expressions containing both ADD/SUB and MUL operations to enable your compiler to generate FMA instructions wherever possible.
For instance a + b*c is a valid FMA (MUL then ADD).
However (a+b)* c cannot be translated into an FMA (ADD then MUL).




      6.1.4.1.5  -  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.
 - VDIVPD: 1 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_1>>



      6.1.4.1.6  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

24 AVX-512 instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in vector mode (eight at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 280 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 152: addition or subtraction (88 inside FMA instructions)
 - 120: multiply (88 inside FMA instructions)
 - 8: divide
The binary loop is loading 1440 bytes (180 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 128 bytes (16 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.4.1.8  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.18 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.


      6.1.4.1.9  -  Unroll opportunity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loop is potentially 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: !DIR$ UNROLL_AND_JAM(N), UNROLL_AND_JAM=N, UNROLL(N) or UNROLL=N







      6.1.5  -  Loop 111 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/advec_mom_kernel.f90:183-184.

The related source loop is not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop.

      6.1.5.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6% of peak computational performance is used (2.00 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.5.1.1  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is fully vectorized, using full register length.


Details
All SSE/AVX instructions are used in vector version (process two or more data elements in vector registers).



      6.1.5.1.2  -  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 16.00 to 2.50 cycles (6.40x 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. This will be done by your compiler with no-prec-div or Ofast
 - Check whether you really need double precision. If not, switch to single precision to speedup execution





      6.1.5.1.3  -  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 16.00 to 1.67 cycles (9.60x speedup).


      6.1.5.1.4  -  FMA
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected 8 FMA (fused multiply-add) operations.




      6.1.5.1.5  -  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.
 - VDIVPD: 1 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_1>>



      6.1.5.1.6  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3 AVX-512 instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in vector mode (eight at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 32 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 16: addition or subtraction (8 inside FMA instructions)
 - 8: multiply (all inside FMA instructions)
 - 8: divide
The binary loop is loading 320 bytes (40 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 64 bytes (8 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.5.1.8  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.08 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.







      6.1.6  -  Loop 127 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/advec_mom_kernel.f90:215,227-241.

It is peel/tail loop of related source loop which is unrolled by 2 (including vectorization).
Warnings:
 - Ignoring paths for analysis
 - Too many paths. Rerun with max-paths=16
 - RecMII not computed since number of paths is unknown or > max_paths
 - Streams not analyzed since number of paths is unknown or > max_paths

Try to simplify control and/or increase the maximum number of paths per function/loop through the 'max-paths-nb' option.

This loop has 16 execution paths.

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 = max(0,x) (Fortran instrinsic procedure)


      6.1.6.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4% of peak computational performance is used (1.36 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.6.1.1  -  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 50.00 to 44.00 cycles (1.14x speedup).

Workaround
 - Try to reorganize arrays of structures to structures of arrays
 - Consider to permute loops (see vectorization gain report)
 - To reference allocatable arrays, use "allocatable" instead of "pointer" pointers or qualify them with the "contiguous" attribute (Fortran 2008)
 - For structures, limit to one indirection. For example, use a_b%c instead of a%b%c with a_b set to a%b before this loop



      6.1.6.1.2  -  Unrolling/vectorization cost
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This loop is peel/tail of a unrolled/vectorized loop. If its cost is not negligible compared to the main (unrolled/vectorized) loop, unrolling/vectorization is counterproductive due to low trip count.

Details
The more iterations the main loop is processing, the higher the trip count must be to amortize peel/tail overhead.

Workaround
 - recompile with -prof-gen, execute and recompile with -prof-use (profile-guided optimization)
 - insert !DIR$ LOOP COUNT MAX(n),MIN(n),AVG(n) at top of your loop
 - hardcode most frequent values of loop bounds by adding specialized paths.:
  *  For instance, replace do i=1,n foo(i) with:
select case (n)
  case (4): do i=1,4 foo(i)
  case (6): do i=1,6 foo(i)
  default : do i=1,n foo(i)
end select



      6.1.6.1.3  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is poorly vectorized.
Only 15% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions).


Details
26% of SSE/AVX instructions are used in vector version (process two or more data elements in vector registers):
 - 0% of SSE/AVX loads are used in vector version.
 - 0% of SSE/AVX stores are used in vector version.
 - 20% of SSE/AVX addition or subtraction instructions are used in vector version.
 - 20% of SSE/AVX multiply instructions are used in vector version.
 - 0% of SSE/AVX fused multiply-add instructions are used in vector version.
 - 50% of SSE/AVX divide and square root instructions are used in vector version.
 - 40% of SSE/AVX instructions that are not load, store, addition, subtraction nor multiply instructions are used in vector version.



      6.1.6.1.4  -  Execution units bottlenecks
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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




      6.1.6.1.5  -  Masked instructions
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected masked instructions.

Details
Vector registers are partially exploited, which is expected if your loop is irregular or mixes elements of different sizes.

Workaround
If your loop is irregular, try to remove or hoist conditional structures out of your loop. If it mixes elements of different sizes, try to uniformize them.


      6.1.6.1.6  -  FMA
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected 4 FMA (fused multiply-add) operations.
Presence of both ADD/SUB and MUL operations.

Workaround
Try to change order in which elements are evaluated (using parentheses) in arithmetic expressions containing both ADD/SUB and MUL operations to enable your compiler to generate FMA instructions wherever possible.
Estimated speedup by perfect pairing: 1.07x.
For instance a + b*c is a valid FMA (MUL then ADD).
However (a+b)* c cannot be translated into an FMA (ADD then MUL).




      6.1.6.1.7  -  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.
 - CMOVA: 16 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_1>>



      6.1.6.1.8  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

64 SSE or AVX instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in scalar mode (one at a time).
12 SSE or AVX instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in vector mode (two at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 68 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 28: addition or subtraction (4 inside FMA instructions)
 - 28: multiply (4 inside FMA instructions)
 - 12: divide
The binary loop is loading 412 bytes (51 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 32 bytes (4 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.6.1.10  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.15 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.







      6.1.7  -  Loop 123 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/advec_mom_kernel.f90:247-248.

It is main loop of related source loop which is unrolled by 16 (including vectorization).

      6.1.7.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6% of peak computational performance is used (2.00 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.7.1.1  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is fully vectorized, using full register length.


Details
All SSE/AVX instructions are used in vector version (process two or more data elements in vector registers).



      6.1.7.1.2  -  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 32.00 to 5.00 cycles (6.40x 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. This will be done by your compiler with no-prec-div or Ofast
 - Check whether you really need double precision. If not, switch to single precision to speedup execution





      6.1.7.1.3  -  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 32.00 to 3.00 cycles (10.67x speedup).


      6.1.7.1.4  -  FMA
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected 16 FMA (fused multiply-add) operations.




      6.1.7.1.5  -  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.
 - VDIVPD: 2 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_1>>



      6.1.7.1.6  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6 AVX-512 instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in vector mode (eight at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 64 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 32: addition or subtraction (16 inside FMA instructions)
 - 16: multiply (all inside FMA instructions)
 - 16: divide
The binary loop is loading 640 bytes (80 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 128 bytes (16 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.7.1.8  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.08 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.







      6.1.8  -  Loop 182 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/flux_calc_kernel.f90:56-60.

The related source loop is not unrolled or unrolled with no peel/tail loop.

      6.1.8.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

50% of peak computational performance is used (16.00 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.8.1.1  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is fully vectorized, using full register length.


Details
All SSE/AVX instructions are used in vector version (process two or more data elements in vector registers).



      6.1.8.1.2  -  Execution units bottlenecks
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance is limited by execution of FP multiply or FMA (fused multiply-add) operations (the FP multiply/FMA unit is a bottleneck).

By removing all these bottlenecks, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 5.00 to 4.00 cycles (1.25x speedup).


Workaround
Reduce the number of FP multiply/FMA instructions




      6.1.8.1.3  -  FMA
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence of both ADD/SUB and MUL operations.

Workaround
 - Pass to your compiler a micro-architecture specialization option:
  * use axHost or xHost
 - Try to change order in which elements are evaluated (using parentheses) in arithmetic expressions containing both ADD/SUB and MUL operations to enable your compiler to generate FMA instructions wherever possible.
Estimated speedup by perfect pairing: 1.50x.
For instance a + b*c is a valid FMA (MUL then ADD).
However (a+b)* c cannot be translated into an FMA (ADD then MUL).





      6.1.8.1.4  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10 AVX-512 instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in vector mode (eight at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 80 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 48: addition or subtraction
 - 32: multiply
The binary loop is loading 640 bytes (80 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 128 bytes (16 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.8.1.6  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.10 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.


      6.1.8.1.7  -  Unroll opportunity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loop is potentially 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: !DIR$ UNROLL_AND_JAM(N), UNROLL_AND_JAM=N, UNROLL(N) or UNROLL=N







      6.1.9  -  Loop 115 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/advec_mom_kernel.f90:151-152,158-177.

It is main loop of related source loop which is unrolled by 4 (including vectorization).
Warnings:
 - Ignoring paths for analysis
 - Too many paths. Rerun with max-paths=16
 - RecMII not computed since number of paths is unknown or > max_paths
 - Streams not analyzed since number of paths is unknown or > max_paths

Try to simplify control and/or increase the maximum number of paths per function/loop through the 'max-paths-nb' option.

This loop has 16 execution paths.

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 = max(0,x) (Fortran instrinsic procedure)


      6.1.9.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8% of peak computational performance is used (2.83 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.9.1.1  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is highly vectorized.
82% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions).


Details
99% of SSE/AVX instructions are used in vector version (process two or more data elements in vector registers):
 - 96% of SSE/AVX loads are used in vector version.
 - 98% of SSE/AVX instructions that are not load, store, addition, subtraction nor multiply instructions are used in vector version.



      6.1.9.1.2  -  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 192.00 to 120.50 cycles (1.59x 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. This will be done by your compiler with no-prec-div or Ofast
 - Check whether you really need double precision. If not, switch to single precision to speedup execution





      6.1.9.1.3  -  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 192.00 to 102.50 cycles (1.87x speedup).


      6.1.9.1.4  -  Masked instructions
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected masked instructions.

Details
Vector registers are partially exploited, which is expected if your loop is irregular or mixes elements of different sizes.

Workaround
If your loop is irregular, try to remove or hoist conditional structures out of your loop. If it mixes elements of different sizes, try to uniformize them.


      6.1.9.1.5  -  FMA
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected 64 FMA (fused multiply-add) operations.
Presence of both ADD/SUB and MUL operations.

Workaround
Try to change order in which elements are evaluated (using parentheses) in arithmetic expressions containing both ADD/SUB and MUL operations to enable your compiler to generate FMA instructions wherever possible.
For instance a + b*c is a valid FMA (MUL then ADD).
However (a+b)* c cannot be translated into an FMA (ADD then MUL).




      6.1.9.1.6  -  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.
 - VDIVPD: 12 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_1>>
 - VGATHERQPD: 20 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_2>>



      6.1.9.1.7  -  Gather/scatter instructions
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected gather/scatter instructions (typically caused by indirect accesses).

Details
 - VGATHERQPD: 20 occurrences<<list_path_1_gather_scatter_1>>


Workaround
Try to simplify your code and/or replace indirect accesses with unit-stride ones.


      6.1.9.1.8  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

84 AVX-512 instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in vector mode (eight at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 544 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 224: addition or subtraction (64 inside FMA instructions)
 - 224: multiply (64 inside FMA instructions)
 - 96: divide
The binary loop is loading 1904 bytes (238 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 256 bytes (32 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.9.1.10  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.25 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.







      6.1.10  -  Loop 89 from exec
  ==========================================================================================================

The loop is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/build/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/CloverLeaf_ref/kernels/advec_cell_kernel.f90:204,216-248.

It is peel/tail loop of related source loop which is unrolled by 4 (including vectorization).
Warnings:
 - Ignoring paths for analysis
 - Too many paths. Rerun with max-paths=16
 - RecMII not computed since number of paths is unknown or > max_paths
 - Streams not analyzed since number of paths is unknown or > max_paths

Try to simplify control and/or increase the maximum number of paths per function/loop through the 'max-paths-nb' option.

This loop has 16 execution paths.

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 = max(0,x) (Fortran instrinsic procedure)


      6.1.10.1  -  Path 1
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5% of peak computational performance is used (1.63 out of 32.00 FLOP per cycle (GFLOPS @ 1GHz))

      6.1.10.1.1  -  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 35.50 to 30.67 cycles (1.16x speedup).

Workaround
 - Try to reorganize arrays of structures to structures of arrays
 - Consider to permute loops (see vectorization gain report)
 - To reference allocatable arrays, use "allocatable" instead of "pointer" pointers or qualify them with the "contiguous" attribute (Fortran 2008)
 - For structures, limit to one indirection. For example, use a_b%c instead of a%b%c with a_b set to a%b before this loop



      6.1.10.1.2  -  Unrolling/vectorization cost
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This loop is peel/tail of a unrolled/vectorized loop. If its cost is not negligible compared to the main (unrolled/vectorized) loop, unrolling/vectorization is counterproductive due to low trip count.

Details
The more iterations the main loop is processing, the higher the trip count must be to amortize peel/tail overhead.

Workaround
 - recompile with -prof-gen, execute and recompile with -prof-use (profile-guided optimization)
 - insert !DIR$ LOOP COUNT MAX(n),MIN(n),AVG(n) at top of your loop
 - hardcode most frequent values of loop bounds by adding specialized paths.:
  *  For instance, replace do i=1,n foo(i) with:
select case (n)
  case (4): do i=1,4 foo(i)
  case (6): do i=1,6 foo(i)
  default : do i=1,n foo(i)
end select



      6.1.10.1.3  -  Vectorization
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your loop is probably not vectorized.
Only 14% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions).


Details
Store and arithmetical SSE/AVX instructions are used in scalar version (process only one data element in vector registers).



      6.1.10.1.4  -  Execution units bottlenecks
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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




      6.1.10.1.5  -  Masked instructions
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected masked instructions.

Details
Vector registers are partially exploited, which is expected if your loop is irregular or mixes elements of different sizes.

Workaround
If your loop is irregular, try to remove or hoist conditional structures out of your loop. If it mixes elements of different sizes, try to uniformize them.


      6.1.10.1.6  -  FMA
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detected 6 FMA (fused multiply-add) operations.
Presence of both ADD/SUB and MUL operations.

Workaround
Try to change order in which elements are evaluated (using parentheses) in arithmetic expressions containing both ADD/SUB and MUL operations to enable your compiler to generate FMA instructions wherever possible.
Estimated speedup by perfect pairing: 1.09x.
For instance a + b*c is a valid FMA (MUL then ADD).
However (a+b)* c cannot be translated into an FMA (ADD then MUL).




      6.1.10.1.7  -  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.
 - CMOVBE: 6 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_1>>
 - SETBE: 2 occurrences<<list_path_1_complex_2>>



      6.1.10.1.8  -  Type of elements and instruction set
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

70 SSE or AVX instructions are processing arithmetic or math operations on double precision FP elements in scalar mode (one at a time).



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

The binary loop is composed of 58 FP arithmetical operations:
 - 24: addition or subtraction (6 inside FMA instructions)
 - 28: multiply (6 inside FMA instructions)
 - 6: divide
The binary loop is loading 284 bytes (35 double precision FP elements).
The binary loop is storing 32 bytes (4 double precision FP elements).


      6.1.10.1.10  -  Arithmetic intensity
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arithmetic intensity is 0.18 FP operations per loaded or stored byte.





[MAQAO] Info: STOP THE REPORT GENERATION
[MAQAO] Info: 
[MAQAO] Info: If your application produces files, they can be found in directory "/beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/178-661-4073/intel/CloverLeaf1.3-FC/run/oneview_runs/compilers/icx_7/oneview_run_1786617349"
[MAQAO] Info: 
