Neoverse ACFL O2 | Neoverse ACFL O3 | Neoverse ACFL Ofast |
---|---|---|
[ 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. |
[ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -mcpu is used | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -mcpu is used | [ 3.00 / 3 ] Architecture specific option -mcpu is used |
[ 2.40 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g and -grecord-gcc-switches) cumulate 0.06% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g and (-grecord-gcc-switches or -frecord-command-line) are present. Remark: if -g and (-grecord-gcc-switches / -frecord-command-line) are 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. | [ 2.40 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g and -grecord-gcc-switches) cumulate 0.04% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g and (-grecord-gcc-switches or -frecord-command-line) are present. Remark: if -g and (-grecord-gcc-switches / -frecord-command-line) are 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. | [ 2.40 / 3 ] Most of time spent in analyzed modules comes from functions without compilation information Functions without compilation information (typically not compiled with -g and -grecord-gcc-switches) cumulate 0.09% of the time spent in analyzed modules. Check that -g and (-grecord-gcc-switches or -frecord-command-line) are present. Remark: if -g and (-grecord-gcc-switches / -frecord-command-line) are 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 (21.39 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 (21.52 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 (20.84 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 0.00 % 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 | [ 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 | [ 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 |
[ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 3 / 3 ] Optimization level option is correctly used | [ 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. |
Neoverse ACFL O2 | Neoverse ACFL O3 | Neoverse ACFL Ofast |
---|---|---|
[ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 95.74% of time | [ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 95.79% of time | [ 4 / 4 ] CPU activity is good CPU cores are active 95.77% of time |
[ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.92%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.92%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned | [ 4 / 4 ] Affinity is good (99.93%) Threads are not migrating to CPU cores: probably successfully pinned |
[ 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 (2.54%) | [ 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 (2.38%) | [ 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 (2.78%) |
[ 3 / 3 ] Cumulative Outermost/In between loops coverage (39.24%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (47.17%) 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 (39.79%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (46.82%) 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 (37.13%) lower than cumulative innermost loop coverage (49.44%) 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 3056.60% of observed threads are actually active | [ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good On average, more than 3058.94% of observed threads are actually active | [ 4 / 4 ] Threads activity is good On average, more than 3057.98% 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. | [ 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 (47.17%) 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 (46.82%) 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 (49.44%) 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 | [ 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% (0.00%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions) | [ 2 / 2 ] Less than 10% (0.00%) is spend in Libm/SVML (special functions) | [ 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% (29.51%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (30.05%), representing an hotspot for the application | [ 4 / 4 ] Loop profile is not flat At least one loop coverage is greater than 4% (28.25%), representing an hotspot for the application |
[ 4 / 4 ] Enough time of the experiment time spent in analyzed loops (86.42%) 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 (86.61%) 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 (86.57%) 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 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
Less than 10% of the FP ADD/SUB/MUL arithmetic operations are performed using FMA | 7 | 7 | 7 | |
Presence of a large number of scalar integer instructions | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
Control Flow Issues | Non-innermost loop | 3 | 3 | 4 |
Data Access Issues | Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 1 | 1 | 0 |
Vectorization Roadblocks | Presence of more than 4 paths | 3 | 3 | 4 |
Non-innermost loop | 3 | 3 | 4 | |
Presence of constant non-unit stride data access | 1 | 1 | 0 |