OV - exec - Function sortAtomsById

/beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/build/CoMD/CoMD/src-openmp/haloExchange.c: 655 - 661

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

655:    int bId = ((AtomMsg*) b)->gid;

656:    assert(aId != bId);

657:

658:    if (aId < bId)

659:       return -1;

660:    return 1;

661: }

0x408640 MOV	(%RSI),%EAX

0x408642 CMP	%EAX,(%RDI)

0x408644 JE	408651

0x408646 SETGE	%AL

0x408649 MOVZX	%AL,%EAX

0x40864c LEA	-0x1(%RAX,%RAX,1),%EAX

0x408650 RET

0x408651 PUSH	%RBP

0x408652 MOV	%RSP,%RBP

0x408655 MOV	$0x413652,%EDI

0x40865a MOV	$0x41345f,%ESI

0x40865f MOV	$0x41365d,%ECX

0x408664 MOV	$0x290,%EDX

0x408669 CALL	403080 <__assert_fail@plt>

0x40866e XCHG	%AX,%AX

Coverage (%)	Name	Source Location	Module

Coverage (%)	Name	Source Location	Module

Coverage (%)	Name	Source Location	Module

Coverage (%)	Name	Source Location	Module

Coverage (%)	Name	Source Location	Module

Coverage (%)	Name	Source Location	Module

min	med	avg	max

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

min	med	avg	max

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

Path /

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

The code analyzed by CQA in that panel excludes loops and represents 0.16% of application time for run 8x1

Source file and lines	haloExchange.c:655-661
Module	exec

The function is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/build/CoMD/CoMD/src-openmp/haloExchange.c:655-661.

The structure of this function is probably <if then [else] end>.

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

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

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

gain
potential
hint
expert

Vectorization

Your function is not vectorized. Only 8% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions).

Details

All SSE/AVX instructions are used in scalar version (process only one data element in vector registers).

No data for this section

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.

LEA: 0 occurrences

Conversion instructions

Detected expensive conversion instructions.

Details

MOVZX: 0 occurrences

Workaround

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

Type of elements and instruction set

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

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

The binary function does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary function is loading 8 bytes.

General properties

nb instructions	8.50
nb uops	9.50
loop length	26
used x86 registers	5
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	0
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	0

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE

micro-operation queue	1.19 cycles
front end	1.19 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	1.08	1.08	1.08	1.08	1.08	1.08	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
cycles	1.08	1.08	1.08	1.08	1.08	1.08	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00

Execution ports to units layout:

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

Cycles executing div or sqrt instructions

NA

Cycles summary

Front-end	1.19
Dispatch	1.08
Overall L1	1.19

Vectorization ratios

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

Vector efficiency ratios

all	8%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
mul	NA (no mul vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
add-sub	NA (no add-sub vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
fma	NA (no fma vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
div/sqrt	NA (no div/sqrt vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
other	8%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each call to the function takes 1.19 cycles. At this rate:

2% of peak load performance is reached (6.91 out of 256.00 bytes loaded per cycle (GB/s @ 1GHz))

The code analyzed by CQA in that panel excludes loops and represents 0.16% of application time for run 8x1

Source file and lines	haloExchange.c:655-661
Module	exec

The function is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/build/CoMD/CoMD/src-openmp/haloExchange.c:655-661.

The structure of this function is probably <if then [else] end>.

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

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

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

gain
potential
hint
expert

Vectorization

Your function is not vectorized.

Details

No SSE/AVX instruction: only general purpose registers are used and data elements are processed one at a time.

Execution units bottlenecks

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

No data for this section

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.

LEA: 1 occurrences►
- /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/build/CoMD/CoMD/src-openmp/haloExchange.c:658

Conversion instructions

Detected expensive conversion instructions.

Details

MOVZX: 1 occurrences►
- /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/build/CoMD/CoMD/src-openmp/haloExchange.c:658

Workaround

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

Type of elements and instruction set

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

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

The binary function does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary function is loading 8 bytes.

General properties

nb instructions	7
nb uops	8
loop length	17
used x86 registers	3
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	0
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	0

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE FIT IN UOP CACHE

micro-operation queue	1.00 cycles
front end	1.00 cycles

Back-end

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

Execution ports to units layout:

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

Cycles executing div or sqrt instructions

NA

Cycles summary

Front-end	1.00
Dispatch	1.00
Overall L1	1.00

Vectorization ratios

No vectorizable/vectorized instructions

Vector efficiency ratios

No vectorizable/vectorized instructions

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each call to the function takes 1.00 cycles. At this rate:

3% of peak load performance is reached (8.00 out of 256.00 bytes loaded per cycle (GB/s @ 1GHz))

Front-end bottlenecks

Performance is limited by instruction throughput (loading/decoding program instructions to execution core) (front-end is a bottleneck). By removing all these bottlenecks, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 1.00 to 0.75 cycles (1.33x speedup).

ASM code

In the binary file, the address of the function is: 408640

Instruction	Nb FU	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	Latency	Recip. throughput	Vectorization
MOV (%RSI),%EAX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	3	0.25	N/A
CMP %EAX,(%RDI)	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	1	0.25	N/A
JE 408651 <sortAtomsById+0x11>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0.33-1	N/A
SETGE %AL	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	N/A
MOVZX %AL,%EAX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	N/A
LEA -0x1(%RAX,%RAX,1),%EAX	2	0	0	0.50	0.50	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	2	0.50	N/A
RET	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	1	0.50	N/A

The code analyzed by CQA in that panel excludes loops and represents 0.16% of application time for run 8x1

Source file and lines	haloExchange.c:655-661
Module	exec

The function is defined in /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/build/CoMD/CoMD/src-openmp/haloExchange.c:655-661.

The structure of this function is probably <if then [else] end>.

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

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

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

gain
potential
hint
expert

Vectorization

Your function is not vectorized. Only 8% of vector register length is used (average across all SSE/AVX instructions). By vectorizing your function, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 1.38 to 0.09 cycles (16.00x speedup).

Details

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

Workaround

Try another compiler or update/tune your current one
Make array accesses unit-stride:
- If your function streams arrays of structures (AoS), try to use structures of arrays instead (SoA): for(i) a[i].x = b[i].x; (slow, non stride 1) => for(i) a.x[i] = b.x[i]; (fast, stride 1)

Execution units bottlenecks

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

No data for this section

CALL instructions

Detected function call instructions.

Details

Calling (and then returning from) a function prevents many compiler optimizations (like vectorization), breaks control flow (which reduces pipeline performance) and executes extra instructions to save/restore the registers used inside it, which is very expensive (dozens of cycles). Consider to inline small functions.

__assert_fail@plt: 1 occurrences►
- /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/build/CoMD/CoMD/src-openmp/haloExchange.c:656

Type of elements and instruction set

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

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

The binary function does not contain any FP arithmetical operations. The binary function is loading 8 bytes.

General properties

nb instructions	10
nb uops	11
loop length	35
used x86 registers	7
used mmx registers	0
used xmm registers	0
used ymm registers	0
used zmm registers	0
nb stack references	0

Front-end

MACRO FUSION NOT POSSIBLE FIT IN UOP CACHE

micro-operation queue	1.38 cycles
front end	1.38 cycles

Back-end

	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
uops	1.17	1.17	1.17	1.17	1.17	1.17	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
cycles	1.17	1.17	1.17	1.17	1.17	1.17	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.75	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00

Execution ports to units layout:

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

Cycles executing div or sqrt instructions

NA

Cycles summary

Front-end	1.38
Dispatch	1.17
Overall L1	1.38

Vectorization ratios

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

Vector efficiency ratios

all	8%
load	NA (no load vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
store	NA (no store vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
mul	NA (no mul vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
add-sub	NA (no add-sub vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
fma	NA (no fma vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
div/sqrt	NA (no div/sqrt vectorizable/vectorized instructions)
other	8%

Cycles and memory resources usage

Assuming all data fit into the L1 cache, each call to the function takes 1.38 cycles. At this rate:

2% of peak load performance is reached (5.82 out of 256.00 bytes loaded per cycle (GB/s @ 1GHz))

Front-end bottlenecks

Performance is limited by instruction throughput (loading/decoding program instructions to execution core) (front-end is a bottleneck). By removing all these bottlenecks, you can lower the cost of an iteration from 1.38 to 1.17 cycles (1.18x speedup).

ASM code

In the binary file, the address of the function is: 408640

Instruction	Nb FU	P0	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	P9	Latency	Recip. throughput	Vectorization
MOV (%RSI),%EAX	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	3	0.25	N/A
CMP %EAX,(%RDI)	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	1	0.25	N/A
JE 408651 <sortAtomsById+0x11>	1	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0	0	0	0	0	0.33-1	N/A
PUSH %RBP	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0.50	N/A
MOV %RSP,%RBP	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0.17	scal (12.5%)
MOV $0x413652,%EDI	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	N/A
MOV $0x41345f,%ESI	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	N/A
MOV $0x41365d,%ECX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (6.3%)
MOV $0x290,%EDX	1	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0	0	0	0	1	0.17	scal (6.3%)
CALL 403080 <__assert_fail@plt>	2	0	0	0	0.33	0.33	0.33	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0	0.50	N/A

▶Scalability Runs Description

Run 8x1	Number processes: 8Number nodes: NANumber processes per node: 8Run Command: <executable> -x 200 -y 200 -z 200 --xproc=2 --yproc=2 --zproc=2MPI Command: mpirun -n <number_processes> --bind-to core --map-by package:PE=24 --rank-by fill --report-bindings Dataset: Run Directory: /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/run/oneview_runs/multicore/icx_1/oneview_run_1773746383OMP_PROC_BIND: spreadOMP_DISPLAY_AFFINITY: TRUEOMP_AFFINITY_FORMAT: 'OMP: pid %P tid %i thread %n bound to OS proc set {%A}'OMP_DISPLAY_ENV: TRUEOMP_PLACES: threadsOMP_NUM_THREADS: 1
Run 8x8	Number processes: 8Number processes per node: 8Run Command: <executable> -x 200 -y 200 -z 200 --xproc=2 --yproc=2 --zproc=2MPI Command: mpirun -n <number_processes> --bind-to core --map-by package:PE=24 --rank-by fill --report-bindings Dataset: Run Directory: /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/run/oneview_runs/multicore/icx_1/oneview_run_1773746383OMP_NUM_THREADS: 8OMP_PROC_BIND: spreadOMP_DISPLAY_AFFINITY: TRUEOMP_AFFINITY_FORMAT: 'OMP: pid %P tid %i thread %n bound to OS proc set {%A}'OMP_DISPLAY_ENV: TRUEOMP_PLACES: threads
Run 8x12	Number processes: 8Number processes per node: 8Run Command: <executable> -x 200 -y 200 -z 200 --xproc=2 --yproc=2 --zproc=2MPI Command: mpirun -n <number_processes> --bind-to core --map-by package:PE=24 --rank-by fill --report-bindings Dataset: Run Directory: /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/run/oneview_runs/multicore/icx_1/oneview_run_1773746383OMP_NUM_THREADS: 12OMP_PROC_BIND: spreadOMP_DISPLAY_AFFINITY: TRUEOMP_AFFINITY_FORMAT: 'OMP: pid %P tid %i thread %n bound to OS proc set {%A}'OMP_DISPLAY_ENV: TRUEOMP_PLACES: threads
Run 8x16	Number processes: 8Number processes per node: 8Run Command: <executable> -x 200 -y 200 -z 200 --xproc=2 --yproc=2 --zproc=2MPI Command: mpirun -n <number_processes> --bind-to core --map-by package:PE=24 --rank-by fill --report-bindings Dataset: Run Directory: /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/run/oneview_runs/multicore/icx_1/oneview_run_1773746383OMP_NUM_THREADS: 16OMP_PROC_BIND: spreadOMP_DISPLAY_AFFINITY: TRUEOMP_AFFINITY_FORMAT: 'OMP: pid %P tid %i thread %n bound to OS proc set {%A}'OMP_DISPLAY_ENV: TRUEOMP_PLACES: threads
Run 8x20	Number processes: 8Number processes per node: 8Run Command: <executable> -x 200 -y 200 -z 200 --xproc=2 --yproc=2 --zproc=2MPI Command: mpirun -n <number_processes> --bind-to core --map-by package:PE=24 --rank-by fill --report-bindings Dataset: Run Directory: /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/run/oneview_runs/multicore/icx_1/oneview_run_1773746383OMP_NUM_THREADS: 20OMP_PROC_BIND: spreadOMP_DISPLAY_AFFINITY: TRUEOMP_AFFINITY_FORMAT: 'OMP: pid %P tid %i thread %n bound to OS proc set {%A}'OMP_DISPLAY_ENV: TRUEOMP_PLACES: threads
Run 8x24	Number processes: 8Number processes per node: 8Run Command: <executable> -x 200 -y 200 -z 200 --xproc=2 --yproc=2 --zproc=2MPI Command: mpirun -n <number_processes> --bind-to core --map-by package:PE=24 --rank-by fill --report-bindings Dataset: Run Directory: /beegfs/hackathon/users/eoseret/qaas_runs_test/gmz12.benchmarkcenter.megware.com/177-374-1600/CoMD/run/oneview_runs/multicore/icx_1/oneview_run_1773746383OMP_NUM_THREADS: 24OMP_PROC_BIND: spreadOMP_DISPLAY_AFFINITY: TRUEOMP_AFFINITY_FORMAT: 'OMP: pid %P tid %i thread %n bound to OS proc set {%A}'OMP_DISPLAY_ENV: TRUEOMP_PLACES: threads

(8x1) Efficiency	(8x1) Potential Speed-Up (%)	(8x8) Efficiency	(8x8) Potential Speed-Up (%)	(8x12) Efficiency	(8x12) Potential Speed-Up (%)	(8x16) Efficiency	(8x16) Potential Speed-Up (%)	(8x20) Efficiency	(8x20) Potential Speed-Up (%)	(8x24) Efficiency	(8x24) Potential Speed-Up (%)
1	0	1.66	0	1.43	0	1.49	0	1.86	0	1.56	0

Speed-Up and Efficiency

▶Detailed Speed-Up and Efficiency

Run	Number of threads	Efficiency (ideal is 1)	Speedup	Ideal Speedup	Time (s)	Coverage (%)
8x1	8	1	1	1	0.73500001430511	0.15703442692757
8x8	35	1.66	8.3	5	0.12999999523163	0.13325956463814
8x12	56	1.43	12.84	9	0.10000000149012	0.1141522526741
8x16	62	1.49	19.42	13	0.084999993443489	0.090737953782082
8x20	63	1.86	31.65	17	0.075000002980232	0.059798806905746
8x24	73	1.56	32.74	21	0.079999998211861	0.063077881932259

Name	Coverage (%)	Time (s)
○sortAtomsById	0.16	0.63

Report Configuration

Vectorization

Details

Complex instructions

Details

Conversion instructions

Details

Workaround

Type of elements and instruction set

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

General properties

Front-end

Back-end

Cycles summary

Vectorization ratios

Vector efficiency ratios

Cycles and memory resources usage

Vectorization

Details

Execution units bottlenecks

Complex instructions

Details

Conversion instructions

Details

Workaround

Type of elements and instruction set

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

General properties

Front-end

Back-end

Cycles summary

Vectorization ratios

Vector efficiency ratios

Cycles and memory resources usage

Front-end bottlenecks

ASM code

Vectorization

Details

Workaround

Execution units bottlenecks

CALL instructions

Details

Type of elements and instruction set

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

General properties

Front-end

Back-end

Cycles summary

Vectorization ratios

Vector efficiency ratios

Cycles and memory resources usage

Front-end bottlenecks

ASM code

▶Scalability Runs Description

▼Columns Filter

Speed-Up and Efficiency

▶Detailed Speed-Up and Efficiency