| orig_default | gcc_default | icx_7 | gcc_5 |
|---|---|---|---|
[ 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. |
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 |
[ 2.99 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=native is used | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=icelake-server is used | [ 2.99 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -x ICELAKE is used | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=icelake-server is used |
[ 2.99 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions compiled with -g and -fno-omit-frame-pointer -g option gives access to debugging informations, such are source locations. -fno-omit-frame-pointer improve the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling. | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions compiled with -g and -fno-omit-frame-pointer -g option gives access to debugging informations, such are source locations. -fno-omit-frame-pointer improve the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling. | [ 2.99 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions compiled with -g and -fno-omit-frame-pointer -g option gives access to debugging informations, such are source locations. -fno-omit-frame-pointer improve the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling. | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions compiled with -g and -fno-omit-frame-pointer -g option gives access to debugging informations, such are source locations. -fno-omit-frame-pointer improve the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling. |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (89.32 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 (74.40 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 (83.79 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 (75.44 s) To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds. |
[ 2 / 2 ] Application is correctly profiled ("Others" category represents 0.30 % 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 0.46 % 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 0.30 % 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 0.46 % 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 |
[ 2.99 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 2.99 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used |
[ 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. |
| orig_default | gcc_default | icx_7 | gcc_5 |
|---|---|---|---|
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 98.18% of time | [ 3 / 4 ] CPU activity is below 90% (70.56%) CPU cores are idle more than 10% of time. Threads supposed to run on these cores 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 98.09% of time | [ 3 / 4 ] CPU activity is below 90% (71.17%) CPU cores are idle more than 10% of time. Threads supposed to run on these cores are probably IO/sync waiting. Some hints: use faster filesystems to read/write data, improve parallel load balancing and/or scheduling. |
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.96%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.96%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.96%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.96%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (65.37%) 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 (91.08%) 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 (63.27%) 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 (91.10%) If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances. |
[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (0.98%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (64.39%) 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 (13.76%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (77.33%) 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 (1.16%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (62.11%) 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 (14.00%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (77.09%) 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 97.35% of observed threads are actually active | [ 2 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (30.10%) 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 ] Threads activity is good On average, more than 97.20% of observed threads are actually active | [ 3 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (29.50%) On average, more than 10% of observed threads are idle. Such threads are probably IO/sync waiting. Some hints: use faster filesystems to read/write data, improve parallel load balancing and/or scheduling. |
[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS2 operations BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining. | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS2 operations BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining. | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in BLAS2 operations BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining. | [ 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 (64.39%) 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 (77.33%) 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 (62.11%) 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 (77.09%) 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% (59.24%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (70.58%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (56.63%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (69.92%), representing an hotspot for the application |
| Analysis | r_1 | r_2 | r_3 | r_4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loop Computation Issues | Presence of expensive FP instructions | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| Less than 10% of the FP ADD/SUB/MUL arithmetic operations are performed using FMA | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |
| Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions | 3 | 5 | 5 | 4 | |
| Low iteration count | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Control Flow Issues | Presence of calls | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| Presence of more than 4 paths | 1 | 6 | 3 | 6 | |
| Non-innermost loop | 2 | 4 | 3 | 4 | |
| Low iteration count | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Data Access Issues | Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 2 | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| Presence of indirect access | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| More than 10% of the vector loads instructions are unaligned | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Presence of expensive instructions: scatter/gather | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 6 | 1 | 5 | 0 | |
| More than 20% of the loads are accessing the stack | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | |
| Vectorization Roadblocks | Presence of calls | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| Presence of more than 4 paths | 1 | 6 | 3 | 6 | |
| Non-innermost loop | 2 | 4 | 3 | 4 | |
| Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 2 | 4 | 2 | 4 | |
| Presence of indirect access | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Inefficient Vectorization | Presence of expensive instructions: scatter/gather | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 6 | 1 | 5 | 0 | |
| Use of masked instructions | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |