| /home_nfs/projects/pro_2023_esiwace3/bmorvana_workdir/maqao_ecrad_default_reports_2025-11-24.15-46-06/maqao_medium_nvhpc.25.7 | /home_nfs/projects/pro_2023_esiwace3/bmorvana_workdir/maqao_ecrad_default_reports_2025-11-24.15-46-06/maqao_medium_nvhpc.25.7.ompt | /home_nfs/projects/pro_2023_esiwace3/bmorvana_workdir/maqao_ecrad_default_reports_2025-11-24.15-46-06/maqao_medium_acfl.24.10.1 |
|---|---|---|
[ 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. |
[ 0 / 3 ] Compilation of some functions is not optimized for the target processor Architecture specific options are needed to produce efficient code for a specific processor ( -mcpu=native ). | [ 0 / 3 ] Compilation of some functions is not optimized for the target processor Architecture specific options are needed to produce efficient code for a specific processor ( -mcpu=native ). | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -mcpu is used |
[ 0 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 100.00% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g is present. Remark: if -g is indeed used, this can also be due to some compiler built-in functions (typically math) or statically linked libraries. This warning can be ignored in that case. | [ 0 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 100.00% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g is present. Remark: if -g is indeed used, this can also be due to some compiler built-in functions (typically math) or statically linked libraries. This warning can be ignored in that case. | [ 0 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g) cumulate 100.00% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g is present. Remark: if -g is indeed used, this can also be due to some compiler built-in functions (typically math) or statically linked libraries. This warning can be ignored in that case. |
[ 4 / 4 ] Application profile is long enough (69.68 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 (68.63 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 (53.65 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 12.30 % 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 12.42 % 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 0.11 % 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 |
[ 0 / 3 ] Some functions are compiled with a low optimization level (O0 or O1) To have better performances, it is advised to help the compiler by using a proper optimization level (-O2 of higher). Warning, depending on compilers, faster optimization levels can decrease numeric accuracy. | [ 0 / 3 ] Some functions are compiled with a low optimization level (O0 or O1) To have better performances, it is advised to help the compiler by using a proper optimization level (-O2 of higher). Warning, depending on compilers, faster optimization levels can decrease numeric accuracy. | [ 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. |
| /home_nfs/projects/pro_2023_esiwace3/bmorvana_workdir/maqao_ecrad_default_reports_2025-11-24.15-46-06/maqao_medium_nvhpc.25.7 | /home_nfs/projects/pro_2023_esiwace3/bmorvana_workdir/maqao_ecrad_default_reports_2025-11-24.15-46-06/maqao_medium_nvhpc.25.7.ompt | /home_nfs/projects/pro_2023_esiwace3/bmorvana_workdir/maqao_ecrad_default_reports_2025-11-24.15-46-06/maqao_medium_acfl.24.10.1 |
|---|---|---|
[ 3 / 4 ] CPU activity is below 90% (83.58%) 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. | [ 3 / 4 ] CPU activity is below 90% (83.12%) 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. | [ 0 / 4 ] CPU activity is below 90% (19.01%) 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 ] Affinity is good (91.50%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (91.87%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (96.78%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned |
[ 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 (12.37%). 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 | [ 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 (12.54%). 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 ] Functions mostly use all threads Functions running on a reduced number of threads (typically sequential code) cover less than 10% of application walltime (2.48%) |
[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (8.38%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (75.45%) 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 (8.55%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (75.09%) 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 (9.18%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (73.53%) Having cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage greater than cumulative innermost loop coverage will make loop optimization more complex |
[ 3 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (23.71%) 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. | [ 3 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (24.14%) 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. | [ 0 / 4 ] A significant amount of threads are idle (80.99%) 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. |
[ 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 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 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 (75.45%) 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 (75.09%) 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 (73.53%) 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 |
[ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (1.60%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions) | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (1.62%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions) | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (1.82%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions) |
[ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (12.52%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (12.50%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (10.83%), representing an hotspot for the application |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (83.83%) 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 (83.64%) 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 (82.71%) If the time spent in analyzed loops is less than 30%, standard loop optimizations will have a limited impact on application performances. |
| Analysis | r0 | r1 | r2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loop Computation Issues | Presence of expensive FP instructions | 7 | 7 | 6 |
| Less than 10% of the FP ADD/SUB/MUL arithmetic operations are performed using FMA | 3 | 3 | 2 | |
| Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| Control Flow Issues | Presence of calls | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| Data Access Issues | Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Presence of indirect access | 7 | 7 | 2 | |
| Vectorization Roadblocks | Presence of calls | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| Presence of more than 4 paths | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 5 | 5 | 5 | |
| Presence of indirect access | 7 | 7 | 2 | |