Help is available by moving the cursor above any 
symbol or by checking MAQAO website.
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (87.50 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=armv8.4-a+sve 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 (93.32%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good
CPU cores are active 99.81% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 99.81% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.98%)
Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat
At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (69.87%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (93.32%)
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 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (0.00%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (93.32%)
Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex
[ 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 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 2517 - bench | Execution Time: 69 % - Vectorization Ratio: 88.17 % - Vector Length Use: 100.00 % | |
| ►Data Access Issues | 62 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of constant non unit stride data access - Use array restructuring, perform loop interchange or use gather instructions to lower a bit the cost. There are 31 issues ( = data accesses) costing 2 point each. | 62 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 62 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of constant non unit stride data access - Use array restructuring, perform loop interchange or use gather instructions to lower a bit the cost. There are 31 issues ( = data accesses) costing 2 point each. | 62 |
| ►Loop 2023 - bench | Execution Time: 20 % - Vectorization Ratio: 83.33 % - Vector Length Use: 51.39 % | |
| ►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 |
| ►Data Access Issues | 4 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of constant non unit stride data access - Use array restructuring, perform loop interchange or use gather instructions to lower a bit the cost. There are 2 issues ( = data accesses) costing 2 point each. | 4 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 4 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of constant non unit stride data access - Use array restructuring, perform loop interchange or use gather instructions to lower a bit the cost. There are 2 issues ( = data accesses) costing 2 point each. | 4 |
| ►Loop 510 - bench | Execution Time: 2 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 27.78 % | |
| ►Control Flow Issues | 1 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of calls - Inline either by compiler or by hand and use SVML for libm calls. There are 1 issues (= calls) costing 1 point each. | 1 |
| ►Data Access Issues | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of constant non unit stride data access - Use array restructuring, perform loop interchange or use gather instructions to lower a bit the cost. There are 1 issues ( = data accesses) costing 2 point each. | 2 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 3 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of calls - Inline either by compiler or by hand and use SVML for libm calls. There are 1 issues (= calls) costing 1 point each. | 1 |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of constant non unit stride data access - Use array restructuring, perform loop interchange or use gather instructions to lower a bit the cost. There are 1 issues ( = data accesses) costing 2 point each. | 2 |
| ►Loop 554 - bench | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 25.00 % | |
| ►Control Flow Issues | 1 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of calls - Inline either by compiler or by hand and use SVML for libm calls. There are 1 issues (= calls) costing 1 point each. | 1 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 1 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of calls - Inline either by compiler or by hand and use SVML for libm calls. There are 1 issues (= calls) costing 1 point each. | 1 |
| ►Loop 129 - bench | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 25.00 % | |
| ►Control Flow Issues | 1 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of calls - Inline either by compiler or by hand and use SVML for libm calls. There are 1 issues (= calls) costing 1 point each. | 1 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 1 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of calls - Inline either by compiler or by hand and use SVML for libm calls. There are 1 issues (= calls) costing 1 point each. | 1 |