Help is available by moving the cursor above any 
symbol or by checking MAQAO website.
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (16.04 s)
To have good quality measurements, it is advised that the application profiling time is greater than 10 seconds.
[ 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.
[ 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 GRANITE_RAPIDS micro-architecture while the code was specialized for graniterapids.
Architecture specific options are needed to produce efficient code for a specific processor ( -x(target) or -ax(target) ).
[ 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 (98.21%)
If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances.
[ 3 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (10.48%)
On average, more than 10% of observed threads are idle. Such threads are probably IO/sync waiting. Some hints: use faster filesystems to read/write data, improve parallel load balancing and/or scheduling.
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good
CPU cores are active 90.33% of time
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat
At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (28.99%), representing an hotspot for the application
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed innermost loops (98.21%)
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 (90.44%)
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 (12.97%). 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 (98.21%)
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 4 - exec | Execution Time: 28 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 50.00 % | |
| ►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 |
| ►Data Access Issues | 0 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: more than 10% of the vector loads instructions are unaligned - When allocating arrays, don’t forget to align them. There are 0 issues ( = arrays) costing 2 points each | 0 |
| ►Loop 3 - exec | Execution Time: 28 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 50.00 % | |
| ►Data Access Issues | 0 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: more than 10% of the vector loads instructions are unaligned - When allocating arrays, don’t forget to align them. There are 0 issues ( = arrays) costing 2 points each | 0 |
| ►Loop 5 - exec | Execution Time: 19 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 50.00 % | |
| ►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 6 - exec | Execution Time: 19 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 50.00 % | |
| ►Data Access Issues | 0 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: more than 10% of the vector loads instructions are unaligned - When allocating arrays, don’t forget to align them. There are 0 issues ( = arrays) costing 2 points each | 0 |
| ○Loop 8 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 50.00 % | |
| ►Loop 7 - exec | Execution Time: 0 % - Vectorization Ratio: 100.00 % - Vector Length Use: 50.00 % | |
| ►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 |
| ►Data Access Issues | 0 | |
| ○ | [SA] Inefficient vectorization: more than 10% of the vector loads instructions are unaligned - When allocating arrays, don’t forget to align them. There are 0 issues ( = arrays) costing 2 points each | 0 |