| orig_default |
|---|
[ 3 / 3 ] Host configuration allows retrieval of all necessary metrics. |
[ 2.90 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -x Host is used |
[ 2.90 / 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 (35.04 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 |
[ 2.90 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used |
[ 0 / 1 ] Lstopo was not found on the host (either not installed or not loaded). The Topology lstopo report will not be generated. |
| orig_default |
|---|
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 92.55% of time |
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (94.05%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (84.63%) 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 (27.19%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (57.44%) 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 92.08% of observed threads are actually active |
[ 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. |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (57.44%) 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 |
[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions) |
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (15.42%), representing an hotspot for the application |
| Analysis | r_1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Loop Computation Issues | Presence of expensive FP instructions | 4 |
| Less than 10% of the FP ADD/SUB/MUL arithmetic operations are performed using FMA | 1 | |
| Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions | 2 | |
| Control Flow Issues | Presence of more than 4 paths | 2 |
| Non-innermost loop | 2 | |
| Data Access Issues | Presence of indirect access | 6 |
| Presence of expensive instructions: scatter/gather | 8 | |
| Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 9 | |
| More than 20% of the loads are accessing the stack | 2 | |
| Vectorization Roadblocks | Presence of more than 4 paths | 2 |
| Non-innermost loop | 2 | |
| Presence of indirect access | 6 | |
| Inefficient Vectorization | Presence of expensive instructions: scatter/gather | 8 |
| Presence of special instructions executing on a single port | 9 | |
| Use of masked instructions | 5 | |