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

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

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

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

[ 0 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without source/debug info

Functions without source/debug info (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 52.36% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g is present. Remark: if -g is indeed used, this can also be due to some compiler built-in functions (typically math) or statically linked libraries. This warning can be ignored in that case.

[ 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 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without source/debug info

Functions without source/debug info (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 52.90% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g is present. Remark: if -g is indeed used, this can also be due to some compiler built-in functions (typically math) or statically linked libraries. This warning can be ignored in that case.

[ 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 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation options informations

Functions without compilation options information cumulate 95.69% of the time spent in analyzed modules. For exec, check that both -g and -frecord-command-line 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.

[ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions with compilation options informations and -fno-omit-frame-pointer is present

-fno-omit-frame-pointer improves the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling.

[ 0 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation options informations

Functions without compilation options information cumulate 95.96% of the time spent in analyzed modules. For exec, check that both -g and -frecord-command-line 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.

[ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions with compilation options informations and -fno-omit-frame-pointer is present

-fno-omit-frame-pointer improves the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling.

[ 2 / 2 ] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 0.00 % of the execution time)

To have a representative profiling, it is advised that the category "Others" represents less than 20% of the execution time in order to analyze as much as possible of the user code

[ 2 / 2 ] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 0.00 % of the execution time)

To have a representative profiling, it is advised that the category "Others" represents less than 20% of the execution time in order to analyze as much as possible of the user code

[ 2 / 2 ] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 0.00 % of the execution time)

To have a representative profiling, it is advised that the category "Others" represents less than 20% of the execution time in order to analyze as much as possible of the user code

[ 2 / 2 ] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 0.00 % of the execution time)

To have a representative profiling, it is advised that the category "Others" represents less than 20% of the execution time in order to analyze as much as possible of the user code

[ 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 ] Optimization level option is correctly used

[ 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 ] Optimization level option is correctly used

[ 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 ( -mcpu=native ).

[ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules (100.00%) comes from functions compiled with architecture specialization option -mcpu

[ 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 ( -mcpu=native ).

[ 3 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules (100.00%) comes from functions compiled with architecture specialization option -mcpu

[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (80.76 s)

To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds.

[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (78.81 s)

To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds.

[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (80.29 s)

To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds.

[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (77.50 s)

To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds.

Not available for this run

[ 0 / 0 ] Fastmath not used

Consider to add ffast-math to compilation flags (or replace -O3 with -Ofast) to unlock potential extra speedup by relaxing floating-point computation consistency. Warning: floating-point accuracy may be reduced and the compliance to IEEE/ISO rules/specifications for math functions will be relaxed, typically 'errno' will no longer be set after calling some math functions.

Not available for this run

Not available for this run

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

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

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

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

[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good

CPU cores are active 99.83% of time

[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good

CPU cores are active 98.37% of time

[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good

CPU cores are active 99.84% of time

[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good

CPU cores are active 97.96% of time

[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.93%)

Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned

[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.88%)

Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned

[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.93%)

Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned

[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.89%)

Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned

[ 3 / 3 ] Functions mostly use all threads

Functions running on a reduced number of threads (typically sequential code) cover less than 10% of application walltime (1.44%)

[ 3 / 3 ] Functions mostly use all threads

Functions running on a reduced number of threads (typically sequential code) cover less than 10% of application walltime (1.30%)

[ 3 / 3 ] Functions mostly use all threads

Functions running on a reduced number of threads (typically sequential code) cover less than 10% of application walltime (1.82%)

[ 3 / 3 ] Functions mostly use all threads

Functions running on a reduced number of threads (typically sequential code) cover less than 10% of application walltime (1.42%)

[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (11.27%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (84.31%)

Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex

[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (0.03%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (97.27%)

Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex

[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (7.71%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (88.15%)

Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex

[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (0.03%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (97.24%)

Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex

[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good

On average, more than 95.93% of observed threads are actually active

[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good

On average, more than 95.57% of observed threads are actually active

[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good

On average, more than 95.90% of observed threads are actually active

[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good

On average, more than 95.12% of observed threads are actually active

[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS2 operations

BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining.

[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS2 operations

BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining.

[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS2 operations

BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining.

[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS2 operations

BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining.

[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (84.31%)

If the time spent in analyzed innermost loops is less than 15%, standard innermost loop optimizations such as vectorisation will have a limited impact on application performances.

[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (97.27%)

If the time spent in analyzed innermost loops is less than 15%, standard innermost loop optimizations such as vectorisation will have a limited impact on application performances.

[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (88.15%)

If the time spent in analyzed innermost loops is less than 15%, standard innermost loop optimizations such as vectorisation will have a limited impact on application performances.

[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (97.24%)

If the time spent in analyzed innermost loops is less than 15%, standard innermost loop optimizations such as vectorisation will have a limited impact on application performances.

[ 3 / 3 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS1 operations

It could be more efficient to inline by hand BLAS1 operations

[ 3 / 3 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS1 operations

It could be more efficient to inline by hand BLAS1 operations

[ 3 / 3 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS1 operations

It could be more efficient to inline by hand BLAS1 operations

[ 3 / 3 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS1 operations

It could be more efficient to inline by hand BLAS1 operations

[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions)

[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions)

[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions)

[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions)

[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat

At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (7.43%), representing an hotspot for the application

[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat

At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (8.05%), representing an hotspot for the application

[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat

At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (7.55%), representing an hotspot for the application

[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat

At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (7.74%), representing an hotspot for the application

[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (95.58%)

If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.

[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (97.30%)

If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.

[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (95.86%)

If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.

[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (97.26%)

If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.