| orig_default | gcc_default | icx_2 | gcc_4 |
|---|---|---|---|
[ 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. |
[ 2.87 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=native is used | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=icelake-server is used | [ 2.87 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -x ICELAKE is used | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -march=icelake-server is used |
[ 2.87 / 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. | [ 2.87 / 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 (125.56 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 (128.29 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 (124.41 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 (128.80 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 0.02 % 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 0.03 % 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 0.02 % 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 0.03 % 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 |
[ 2.88 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 2.88 / 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_2 | gcc_4 |
|---|---|---|---|
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 95.48% of time | [ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 93.88% of time | [ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 95.78% of time | [ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 94.41% of time |
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (98.31%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (98.08%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (98.34%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (98.03%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (61.64%) 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 (63.50%) 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 (60.70%) If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances. | [ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (63.94%) 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 (0.14%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (61.50%) 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 (0.20%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (63.31%) 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 (0.16%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (60.55%) 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 (0.19%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (63.75%) 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 95.03% of observed threads are actually active | [ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good On average, more than 93.33% of observed threads are actually active | [ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good On average, more than 95.34% of observed threads are actually active | [ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good On average, more than 93.99% of observed threads are actually active |
[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (2.44%) is spend in BLAS2 operations BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining. | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (2.48%) is spend in BLAS2 operations BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining. | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (2.41%) is spend in BLAS2 operations BLAS2 calls usually could make a poor cache usage and could benefit from inlining. | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (2.44%) 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 (61.50%) 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 (63.31%) 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 (60.55%) 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 (63.75%) 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% (0.01%) 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% (0.01%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions) |
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (25.62%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (24.62%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (26.29%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (25.08%), representing an hotspot for the application |
| Analysis | r_1 | r_2 | r_3 | r_4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loop Computation Issues | Presence of expensive FP instructions | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 |
| Less than 10% of the FP ADD/SUB/MUL arithmetic operations are performed using FMA | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | |
| Control Flow Issues | Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Presence of more than 4 paths | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| Data Access Issues | Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| Presence of indirect access | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| More than 10% of the vector loads instructions are unaligned | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | |
| Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 | |
| More than 20% of the loads are accessing the stack | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Vectorization Roadblocks | Presence of 2 to 4 paths | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Presence of more than 4 paths | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
| Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | |
| Presence of indirect access | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| Out of user code | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Inefficient Vectorization | Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 |
| Use of masked instructions | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |