Help is available by moving the cursor above any 
symbol or by checking MAQAO website.
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (24.48 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 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 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used
[ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics.
[ 3 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=znver4 is used
[ 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
[ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated.
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (77.84%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 97.93% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good
CPU cores are active 98.20% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat
At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (28.36%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (77.84%)
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 (98.19%)
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
[ 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 (4.94%)
[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (0.00%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (77.84%)
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)
| Loop ID | Analysis | Penalty Score |
|---|---|---|
| ○Loop 16 - exec | Execution Time: 28 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop 13 - exec | Execution Time: 28 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Loop 10 - exec | Execution Time: 20 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Loop 21 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Inefficient Vectorization | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: use of masked instructions - Simplify control structure. The issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Loop 8 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ○Loop 4 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (13.46 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 compiled with -g and -fno-omit-frame-pointer
-g option gives access to debugging informations, such are source locations. -fno-omit-frame-pointer improves the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling.
[ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used
[ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics.
[ 3 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=znver4 is used
[ 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
[ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated.
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (74.90%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 763.08% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good
CPU cores are active 96.13% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat
At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (27.29%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (74.90%)
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 (96.10%)
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 (20.75%). 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 (0.00%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (74.90%)
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)
| Loop ID | Analysis | Penalty Score |
|---|---|---|
| ►Loop 13 - exec | Execution Time: 27 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ○Loop 16 - exec | Execution Time: 27 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop 10 - exec | Execution Time: 20 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Loop 8 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Loop 21 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Inefficient Vectorization | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: use of masked instructions - Simplify control structure. The issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ○Loop 4 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (13.13 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 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 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used
[ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics.
[ 3 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=znver4 is used
[ 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
[ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated.
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (79.92%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 1141.43% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good
CPU cores are active 96.00% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat
At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (29.18%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (79.92%)
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 (96.08%)
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 (11.54%). 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 (0.00%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (79.92%)
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)
| Loop ID | Analysis | Penalty Score |
|---|---|---|
| ►Loop 13 - exec | Execution Time: 29 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ○Loop 16 - exec | Execution Time: 28 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop 10 - exec | Execution Time: 21 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Loop 8 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Loop 21 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Inefficient Vectorization | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: use of masked instructions - Simplify control structure. The issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ○Loop 4 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (13.71 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 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 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used
[ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics.
[ 3 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=znver4 is used
[ 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
[ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated.
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (75.34%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 1519.82% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good
CPU cores are active 95.92% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat
At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (27.55%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (75.34%)
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 (95.89%)
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 (16.30%). 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 (0.00%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (75.34%)
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)
| Loop ID | Analysis | Penalty Score |
|---|---|---|
| ►Loop 13 - exec | Execution Time: 27 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ○Loop 16 - exec | Execution Time: 27 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop 10 - exec | Execution Time: 20 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Loop 8 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ○Loop 4 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop 21 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Inefficient Vectorization | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: use of masked instructions - Simplify control structure. The issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (13.61 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 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 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used
[ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics.
[ 3 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=znver4 is used
[ 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
[ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated.
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (76.16%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 1898.54% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good
CPU cores are active 95.98% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat
At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (27.72%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (76.16%)
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 (95.95%)
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 (23.62%). 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 (0.00%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (76.16%)
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)
| Loop ID | Analysis | Penalty Score |
|---|---|---|
| ►Loop 13 - exec | Execution Time: 27 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ○Loop 16 - exec | Execution Time: 27 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop 10 - exec | Execution Time: 20 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Loop 8 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ○Loop 4 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop 21 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Inefficient Vectorization | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: use of masked instructions - Simplify control structure. The issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (13.28 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 compiled with -g and -fno-omit-frame-pointer
-g option gives access to debugging informations, such are source locations. -fno-omit-frame-pointer improves the accuracy of callchains found during the application profiling.
[ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used
[ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics.
[ 3 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=znver4 is used
[ 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
[ 1 / 1 ] Lstopo present. The Topology lstopo report will be generated.
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (79.70%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 2269.44% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good
CPU cores are active 95.78% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat
At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (29.05%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (79.70%)
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 (95.74%)
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 (11.52%). 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 (0.00%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (79.70%)
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)
| Loop ID | Analysis | Penalty Score |
|---|---|---|
| ►Loop 13 - exec | Execution Time: 29 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ○Loop 16 - exec | Execution Time: 28 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop 10 - exec | Execution Time: 21 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ○Loop 4 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop 8 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Loop 21 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 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. | 4 |
| ►Inefficient Vectorization | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: use of masked instructions - Simplify control structure. The issue costs 2 points. | 2 |