Help is available by moving the cursor above any 
symbol or by checking MAQAO website.
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (154.89 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.
[ 0 / 3 ] Compilation of some functions is not optimized for the target processor
Application run on the SKYLAKE micro-architecture while the code was specialized for cascadelake.
[ 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 (99.98%)
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 99.98% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 99.98% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.99%)
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% (90.58%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (95.19%)
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 (4.79%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (95.19%)
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 2 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 90 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop 3 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 1.64 % - Vector Length Use: 11.78 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Control Flow Issues | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Loop 9 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 6 | |
| ○ | [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 |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Data Access Issues | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (81.74 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.
[ 0 / 3 ] Compilation of some functions is not optimized for the target processor
Application run on the SKYLAKE micro-architecture while the code was specialized for cascadelake.
[ 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 (99.86%)
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 95.51% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 191.00% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.81%)
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% (90.63%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (95.19%)
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 (4.67%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (95.19%)
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 2 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 90 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop 3 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 1.64 % - Vector Length Use: 11.78 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Control Flow Issues | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Loop 9 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 6 | |
| ○ | [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 |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Data Access Issues | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (46.80 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.
[ 0 / 3 ] Compilation of some functions is not optimized for the target processor
Application run on the SKYLAKE micro-architecture while the code was specialized for cascadelake.
[ 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 (99.64%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 3 / 4 ] CPU activity is below 90% (88.57%)
CPU cores are idle more than 10% of time. Threads supposed to run on these cores are probably IO/sync waiting. Some hints: use faster filesystems to read/write data, improve parallel load balancing and/or scheduling.
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 354.26% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.52%)
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% (90.35%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (94.65%)
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 (4.99%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (94.65%)
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 2 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 90 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop 3 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 1.64 % - Vector Length Use: 11.78 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Control Flow Issues | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Loop 9 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 6 | |
| ○ | [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 |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Data Access Issues | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (27.64 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.
[ 0 / 3 ] Compilation of some functions is not optimized for the target processor
Application run on the SKYLAKE micro-architecture while the code was specialized for cascadelake.
[ 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 (99.14%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 3 / 4 ] CPU activity is below 90% (77.63%)
CPU cores are idle more than 10% of time. Threads supposed to run on these cores are probably IO/sync waiting. Some hints: use faster filesystems to read/write data, improve parallel load balancing and/or scheduling.
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 620.88% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.07%)
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% (90.23%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (94.39%)
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 (4.75%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (94.39%)
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 2 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 90 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop 3 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 1.64 % - Vector Length Use: 11.78 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Control Flow Issues | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Loop 9 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 6 | |
| ○ | [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 |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Data Access Issues | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (23.58 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.
[ 0 / 3 ] Compilation of some functions is not optimized for the target processor
Application run on the SKYLAKE micro-architecture while the code was specialized for cascadelake.
[ 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 (98.98%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 3 / 4 ] CPU activity is below 90% (73.00%)
CPU cores are idle more than 10% of time. Threads supposed to run on these cores are probably IO/sync waiting. Some hints: use faster filesystems to read/write data, improve parallel load balancing and/or scheduling.
[ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good
On average, more than 729.76% of observed threads are actually active
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (98.87%)
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% (90.00%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (94.15%)
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 (4.83%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (94.15%)
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 2 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 90 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop 3 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 1.64 % - Vector Length Use: 11.78 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 2 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Control Flow Issues | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 21 | |
| ○ | [SA] Too many paths (15 paths) - Simplify control structure. There are 15 issues ( = paths) costing 1 point each with a malus of 4 points. | 19 |
| ○ | [SA] Non innermost loop (Outermost) - Collapse loop with innermost ones. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Loop 9 - kmeans-gcc-O3-all-soa | Execution Time: 4 % - Vectorization Ratio: 0.00 % - Vector Length Use: 11.61 % | |
| ►Loop Computation Issues | 6 | |
| ○ | [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 |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions - Simplify loop structure, perform loop splitting or perform unroll and jam. This issue costs 2 points. | 2 |
| ►Data Access Issues | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |
| ►Vectorization Roadblocks | 12 | |
| ○ | [SA] Presence of indirect accesses - Use array restructuring or gather instructions to lower the cost. There are 3 issues ( = indirect data accesses) costing 4 point each. | 12 |