********************************************************************************
MAQAO 2.20.7 - b5c28035168f9cf8f9fa5fd6efe26ed8c52734e3::20240731-202858 || 2024/07/31
/home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 OV -R1 c=config_OMP_scal.json xp=OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal -WS=strong
CPY: [true] ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi --> /home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/binaries/gmx_mpi
CPY: [true] /home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/install_MPI/lib64/libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 --> /home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/libs/libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0
CMD: OMP_NUM_THREADS=192 /home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 lprof _caller=oneview --xp="/home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/tools/lprof_npsu_run_0" --mpi-command="mpirun -genv I_MPI_FABRICS=shm -n 1" --collect-topology ppn=1 -ldi=libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 -- ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi mdrun -s ion_channel.tpr -nsteps 10000 -pin on -deffnm aocc
CMD: OMP_NUM_THREADS=1 /home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 lprof _caller=oneview --xp="/home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/tools/lprof_npsu_run_1" --mpi-command="mpirun -genv I_MPI_FABRICS=shm -n 1" --collect-topology ppn=1 -ldi=libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 -- ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi mdrun -s ion_channel.tpr -nsteps 10000 -pin on -deffnm aocc
CMD: OMP_NUM_THREADS=2 /home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 lprof _caller=oneview --xp="/home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/tools/lprof_npsu_run_2" --mpi-command="mpirun -genv I_MPI_FABRICS=shm -n 1" --collect-topology ppn=1 -ldi=libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 -- ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi mdrun -s ion_channel.tpr -nsteps 10000 -pin on -deffnm aocc
CMD: OMP_NUM_THREADS=4 /home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 lprof _caller=oneview --xp="/home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/tools/lprof_npsu_run_3" --mpi-command="mpirun -genv I_MPI_FABRICS=shm -n 1" --collect-topology ppn=1 -ldi=libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 -- ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi mdrun -s ion_channel.tpr -nsteps 10000 -pin on -deffnm aocc
CMD: OMP_NUM_THREADS=8 /home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 lprof _caller=oneview --xp="/home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/tools/lprof_npsu_run_4" --mpi-command="mpirun -genv I_MPI_FABRICS=shm -n 1" --collect-topology ppn=1 -ldi=libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 -- ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi mdrun -s ion_channel.tpr -nsteps 10000 -pin on -deffnm aocc
CMD: OMP_NUM_THREADS=16 /home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 lprof _caller=oneview --xp="/home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/tools/lprof_npsu_run_5" --mpi-command="mpirun -genv I_MPI_FABRICS=shm -n 1" --collect-topology ppn=1 -ldi=libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 -- ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi mdrun -s ion_channel.tpr -nsteps 10000 -pin on -deffnm aocc
CMD: OMP_NUM_THREADS=32 /home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 lprof _caller=oneview --xp="/home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/tools/lprof_npsu_run_6" --mpi-command="mpirun -genv I_MPI_FABRICS=shm -n 1" --collect-topology ppn=1 -ldi=libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 -- ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi mdrun -s ion_channel.tpr -nsteps 10000 -pin on -deffnm aocc
CMD: OMP_NUM_THREADS=64 /home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 lprof _caller=oneview --xp="/home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/tools/lprof_npsu_run_7" --mpi-command="mpirun -genv I_MPI_FABRICS=shm -n 1" --collect-topology ppn=1 -ldi=libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 -- ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi mdrun -s ion_channel.tpr -nsteps 10000 -pin on -deffnm aocc
CMD: OMP_NUM_THREADS=128 /home/eoseret/maqao_2.20.7 lprof _caller=oneview --xp="/home/eoseret/gromacs-2024.2/tests/ion/OV1_ZEN4_10K_OMP_scal/tools/lprof_npsu_run_8" --mpi-command="mpirun -genv I_MPI_FABRICS=shm -n 1" --collect-topology ppn=1 -ldi=libgromacs_mpi.so.9.0.0 -- ../../install_MPI/bin/gmx_mpi mdrun -s ion_channel.tpr -nsteps 10000 -pin on -deffnm aocc
In run 1x192, 196 loops were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.4223096742935% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
161 functions were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.3161007775343% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
In run 1x1, 112 loops were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.33468991168775% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
48 functions were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.046184808015823% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
In run 1x2, 121 loops were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.34298968827352% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
20 functions were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.012996314559132% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
In run 1x4, 126 loops were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.3694460822735% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
18 functions were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.010786746861413% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
In run 1x8, 140 loops were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.37072264723247% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
9 functions were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.0049828313058242% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
In run 1x16, 160 loops were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.44418673752807% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
13 functions were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.0053865929075982% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
In run 1x32, 175 loops were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.47720786416903% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
8 functions were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.0027604214847088% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
In run 1x64, 173 loops were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.44017843771144% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
11 functions were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.0025673187046778% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
In run 1x128, 192 loops were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.38053615391254% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
11 functions were discarded from static analysis because their coverage
are lower than object_coverage_threshold value (0.01%).
That represents 0.0015132976914174% of the execution time. To include them, change the value
in the experiment directory configuration file, then rerun the command with the additionnal parameter
--force-static-analysis
