Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Inline a few utility functions around MIR #119459

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 6, 2024

Conversation

cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

Most of them are small enough to benefit from inlining.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Dec 31, 2023

r? @TaKO8Ki

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Dec 31, 2023
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Dec 31, 2023

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

@bors try @rust-timer queue

r=me if perf is good

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Dec 31, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 31, 2023

⌛ Trying commit 9775861 with merge 2141755...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 31, 2023
Inline a few utility functions around MIR

Most of them are small enough to benefit from inlining.
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 31, 2023

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 2141755 (2141755e22eb0402ba7ae195fd5210e4bd6b52ca)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (2141755): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.6% [2.6%, 2.6%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.6% [2.6%, 2.6%] 1

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.7% [2.4%, 3.2%] 10
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 666.95s -> 668.895s (0.29%)
Artifact size: 311.74 MiB -> 311.79 MiB (0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jan 1, 2024
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 1, 2024

📌 Commit 9775861 has been approved by compiler-errors

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 1, 2024
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 6, 2024
…r-errors

Inline a few utility functions around MIR

Most of them are small enough to benefit from inlining.
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 6, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 9775861 with merge aa0c044...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 6, 2024

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jan 6, 2024
@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor Author

cjgillot commented Jan 6, 2024

@bors retry

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 6, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 6, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 9775861 with merge d62f05b...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 6, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: compiler-errors
Pushing d62f05b to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jan 6, 2024
@bors bors merged commit d62f05b into rust-lang:master Jan 6, 2024
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.77.0 milestone Jan 6, 2024
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (d62f05b): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - ACTION NEEDED

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.3% [0.3%, 0.4%] 3
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.3% [0.3%, 0.4%] 3

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.3% [1.3%, 1.3%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-4.0% [-4.0%, -4.0%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.3% [-3.9%, -2.8%] 6
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 668.285s -> 666.064s (-0.33%)
Artifact size: 311.06 MiB -> 311.16 MiB (0.03%)

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Jan 6, 2024
@cjgillot cjgillot deleted the inline-mir-utils branch January 6, 2024 13:40
@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Jan 8, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants