mir-opt: Ignore the dead store statements in MatchBranchSimplification #129931

dianqk · 2024-09-03T13:44:29Z

#128299 simplified

bb0: {
    _2 = discriminant((*_1));
    switchInt(move _2) -> [0: bb4, 1: bb3, otherwise: bb2];
}
bb3: {
    _5 = &(((*_1) as B).0: NestCopy);
    _7 = copy ((((*_1) as B).0: NestCopy).0: i32);
    _9 = &((((*_1) as B).0: NestCopy).1: AllCopy);
    _11 = copy (((((*_1) as B).0: NestCopy).1: AllCopy).0: i32);
    _12 = copy (((((*_1) as B).0: NestCopy).1: AllCopy).1: u64);
    _13 = copy (((((*_1) as B).0: NestCopy).1: AllCopy).2: [i8; 3]);
    _8 = AllCopy { a: move _11, b: move _12, c: move _13 };
    _10 = copy ((((*_1) as B).0: NestCopy).2: [i8; 3]);
    _6 = NestCopy { a: move _7, b: move _8, c: move _10 };
    _0 = Enum1::B(move _6);
    goto -> bb1;
}
bb4: {
    _3 = &(((*_1) as A).0: AllCopy);
    _14 = copy ((((*_1) as A).0: AllCopy).0: i32);
    _15 = copy ((((*_1) as A).0: AllCopy).1: u64);
    _16 = copy ((((*_1) as A).0: AllCopy).2: [i8; 3]);
    _4 = AllCopy { a: move _14, b: move _15, c: move _16 };
    _0 = Enum1::A(move _4);
    StorageDead(_4);
    goto -> bb1;
}

to

bb0: {
    _2 = discriminant((*_1));
    switchInt(move _2) -> [0: bb1, 1: bb2, otherwise: bb4];
}
bb1: {
    _3 = &(((*_1) as A).0: AllCopy);
    _0 = copy (*_1);
    goto -> bb3;
}
bb2: {
    _4 = &(((*_1) as B).0: NestCopy);
    StorageLive(_5);
    _5 = &((((*_1) as B).0: NestCopy).1: AllCopy);
    StorageDead(_5);
    _0 = copy (*_1);
    goto -> bb3;
}

Since all of these are dead store statements, we can simplify and merge them into a single copy statement.

rustbot · 2024-09-03T13:44:37Z

r? @nnethercote

rustbot has assigned @nnethercote.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

dianqk · 2024-09-03T13:45:05Z

r? ghost

rustbot · 2024-09-03T13:45:08Z

Failed to set assignee to ghost: invalid assignee

Note: Only org members with at least the repository "read" role, users with write permissions, or people who have commented on the PR may be assigned.

dianqk · 2024-09-03T13:46:55Z

r? cjgillot

bors · 2024-09-14T17:07:18Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #128299) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

dianqk · 2024-09-14T22:02:59Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2024-09-14T22:04:09Z

⌛ Trying commit 622247a with merge c324112...

Merge these copy statements that simplified the canonical enum clone method by GVN This is blocked by rust-lang#128299.

bors · 2024-09-14T23:56:31Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: c324112 (c3241126e94d7a53a1805ad854686e0bd061b5df)

rust-timer · 2024-09-15T02:22:20Z

Finished benchmarking commit (c324112): 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 (primary 0.9%)

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)	4.0%	[3.0%, 5.1%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.8%	[-5.9%, -1.7%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.9%	[-5.9%, 5.1%]	5

Cycles

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

Binary size

Results (primary 0.0%, secondary -0.0%)

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)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.2%]	11
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.0%	[0.0%, 0.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.3%, -0.0%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.0%	[-0.0%, -0.0%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.0%	[-0.3%, 0.2%]	17

Bootstrap: 760.71s -> 756.595s (-0.54%)
Artifact size: 341.13 MiB -> 341.17 MiB (0.01%)

cjgillot

My high-level reaction to this PR is that it's both too specific in what it's trying to match (a clone impl) and too general in its implementation (handles storage statements...).

I suggest having two heuristics:

for clone impls, use some kind of StructuralClone trait so that we fully replace the derived impls Clone with simpler MIR;
for general MIR, lift the restrictions on this pass (bb0 and assignment to _0 namely).

What do you think?

cjgillot · 2024-09-15T13:07:59Z

compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/lib.rs

@@ -604,6 +602,7 @@ fn run_optimization_passes<'tcx>(tcx: TyCtxt<'tcx>, body: &mut Body<'tcx>) {
            &dead_store_elimination::DeadStoreElimination::Initial,
            &gvn::GVN,
            &simplify::SimplifyLocals::AfterGVN,
+            &match_branches::MatchBranchSimplification,


Should this run on clone shims too? Or do we want a trait-based solution to detect trivial clone impls?

Should this run on clone shims too?

Could you explain more?

Or do we want a trait-based solution to detect trivial clone impls?

It makes sense to me for clone impls.

compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/match_branches.rs

dianqk · 2024-09-18T13:08:45Z

* for clone impls, use some kind of `StructuralClone` trait so that we fully replace the derived impls `Clone` with simpler MIR;

* for general MIR, lift the restrictions on this pass (bb0 and assignment to _0 namely).

What do you think?

It looks like makes sense.
IIUC, the StructuralClone is exact matching clone shims? I expect this can improve compile-time.

@rustbot author

dianqk

I didn't submit all the comments through "Submit review"; there are still some pending comments. o

I am currently modifying the code to move it into a separate pass.

compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/match_branches.rs

dianqk · 2024-09-18T12:44:37Z

compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/lib.rs

@@ -604,6 +602,7 @@ fn run_optimization_passes<'tcx>(tcx: TyCtxt<'tcx>, body: &mut Body<'tcx>) {
            &dead_store_elimination::DeadStoreElimination::Initial,
            &gvn::GVN,
            &simplify::SimplifyLocals::AfterGVN,
+            &match_branches::MatchBranchSimplification,


Should this run on clone shims too?

Could you explain more?

Or do we want a trait-based solution to detect trivial clone impls?

It makes sense to me for clone impls.

dianqk · 2025-04-04T10:06:32Z

Just rebased. Perhaps I should move the code in MatchBranchSimplification.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

mir-opt: Merge all branch BBs into a single copy statement rust-lang#128299 simplified ```rust match a { Foo::A(x) => Foo::A(*x), Foo::B => Foo::B } ``` to ```rust match a { Foo::A(x) => a, // copy a Foo::B => Foo::B } ``` The switch branch can be simplified into a single copy statement. This PR implements a relatively general simplification.

bors · 2025-04-04T10:07:44Z

⌛ Trying commit f05d4af with merge 27bc686...

bors · 2025-04-04T12:21:04Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 27bc686 (27bc686b0d1e864190a5a718151fd4ddcea59971)

rust-timer · 2025-04-04T14:28:28Z

Finished benchmarking commit (27bc686): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

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

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.3%	[0.2%, 0.5%]	6
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-1.4%, -1.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-1.4%, 0.5%]	7

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -3.8%, secondary -2.2%)

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)	-3.8%	[-5.6%, -2.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-3.8%	[-5.6%, -2.1%]	2

Cycles

Results (primary 1.8%, secondary 2.3%)

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)	1.8%	[1.8%, 1.8%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.3%	[2.3%, 2.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.8%	[1.8%, 1.8%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary -0.1%, secondary -0.1%)

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)	0.3%	[0.1%, 0.6%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.0%	[0.0%, 0.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.9%, -0.0%]	17
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	35
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.9%, 0.6%]	20

Bootstrap: 778.988s -> 776.478s (-0.32%)
Artifact size: 365.99 MiB -> 366.08 MiB (0.02%)

cjgillot · 2025-04-04T17:07:03Z

compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/merge_branches.rs

+                let mut patch = MirPatch::new(body);
+                patch.add_assign(parent_end, dest_place, Rvalue::Use(Operand::Copy(src_place)));
+                patch.patch_terminator(switch_bb_idx, first_terminator_kind.clone());
+                patch.apply(body);
+                super::simplify::remove_dead_blocks(body);
+                // After modifying the MIR, the result of `MaybeTransitiveLiveLocals` may become invalid,
+                // keeping it simple to process only once.
+                break;


I'd recommend having a single patch and modify MIR at the end. This allows to catch several instances of the opt in the same body.

I fixed this in 8105aefe072e1dffbcc2f0d9114e48c9add6d03b.

cjgillot · 2025-04-04T17:07:42Z

compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/lib.rs

@@ -609,6 +610,7 @@ fn run_optimization_passes<'tcx>(tcx: TyCtxt<'tcx>, body: &mut Body<'tcx>) {
            &dead_store_elimination::DeadStoreElimination::Initial,
            &gvn::GVN,
            &simplify::SimplifyLocals::AfterGVN,
+            &merge_branches::MergeBranchSimplification,


Should we add a dead_store_elimination::DeadStoreElimination::AfterGVN just before it and simplify your pass?

compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/merge_branches.rs

cjgillot · 2025-04-04T17:16:48Z

compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/merge_branches.rs

+                return None;
+            }
+        }
+        Rvalue::Use(Operand::Copy(place)) if *place == src_place => {}


What about Operand::Move? Downgrading a move to a copy is fine.

I'll address it in the next PR or a subsequent update.

dianqk · 2025-04-06T12:05:06Z

To better handle dead store statements, I'm cloning basic blocks in MatchBranchSimplification and performing DSE. I think this approach is more generic, and easier to maintain and review.

I haven't transformed match a { Foo::A(_x) => a, Foo::B => Foo::B } to a copy statement yet this weekend, but I think this can be a subsequent PR.

@rustbot review

rust-log-analyzer · 2025-04-06T13:07:36Z

The job x86_64-gnu-tools failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

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

Mismatch at tests/source/struct-field-attributes.rs:24:
 // #1462
 struct Foo {
     foo: usize,
-    #[cfg(feature = "include-bar")]
+    #[cfg(feature="include-bar")]
     bar: usize,
 }
 

Mismatch at tests/source/struct-field-attributes.rs:39:
 // #2044
 pub enum State {
     Closure(
-        #[cfg_attr(
-            feature = "serde_derive",
-            serde(state_with = "::serialization::closure")
-        )]
-        GcPtr<ClosureData>,
+        #[cfg_attr(feature = "serde_derive", serde(state_with = "::serialization::closure"))] GcPtr<ClosureData>,
     ),
 }
 

Mismatch at tests/source/struct-field-attributes.rs:50:
 struct Fields(
-    #[cfg_attr(
-        feature = "serde_derive",
-        serde(state_with = "::base::serialization::shared")
-    )]
-    Arc<Vec<InternedStr>>,
+    #[cfg_attr(feature = "serde_derive", serde(state_with = "::base::serialization::shared"))] Arc<Vec<InternedStr>>,
 );
 
 // #2309

Mismatch at tests/source/struct-field-attributes.rs:59:
 pub struct A {
-    #[doc = "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX"]
-    pub foos: Vec<bool>,
+    #[doc="XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX"]
+pub foos:Vec<bool>,
 }
 

Mismatch at tests/source/unions.rs:32:
 // #410
 #[allow(missing_docs)]
 pub union Writebatch<K: Key> {
-    #[allow(dead_code)] // only used for holding the internal pointer
+    #[allow(dead_code)] //only used for holding the internal pointer
     writebatch: RawWritebatch,
     marker: PhantomData<K>,
 }

Mismatch at tests/source/unions.rs:91:
 }
 
 union Palette {
-    /// A map of indices in the palette to a count of pixels in approximately
-    /// that color
-    foo: i32,
+    /// A map of indices in the palette to a count of pixels in approximately that color
+                    foo: i32,
 }
 
 // Splitting a single line comment into a block previously had a misalignment

Mismatch at tests/source/unions.rs:104:
                                        * BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBB */
     // Another pre comment
     #[attr1]
-    #[attr2]
-    pub id: usize, /* CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
-                    * CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCC */
+    #[attr2] pub id: usize, /* CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
+                             * CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCC */
 }
 
 union Deep {

Mismatch at tests/source/unions.rs:113:
-    deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep:
-        node::Handle<IdRef<'id, Node<K, V>>, Type, NodeType>,
+    deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep: node::Handle<IdRef<'id, Node<K, V>>,
+                                                     Type,
+                                                     NodeType>,
 }
 
 mod m {

Mismatch at tests/source/unions.rs:125:
 
 union Issue677 {
     pub ptr: *const libc::c_void,
-    pub trace: fn(obj: *const libc::c_void, tracer: *mut JSTracer),
+    pub trace: fn(  obj: 
+          *const libc::c_void, tracer   : *mut   JSTracer   ),
 }
 
 union Foo {}

Mismatch at tests/source/unions.rs:142:
 
 union LongUnion {
     a: A,
-    the_quick_brown_fox_jumps_over_the_lazy_dog:
-        AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA,
+    the_quick_brown_fox_jumps_over_the_lazy_dog:AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA,
 }
 
 union Deep {

Mismatch at tests/source/unions.rs:150:
-    deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep:
-        node::Handle<IdRef<'id, Node<Key, Value>>, Type, NodeType>,
+    deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep: node::Handle<IdRef<'id, Node<Key, Value>>,
+                                                                         Type,
+                                                                         NodeType>,
 }
 
 // #1364

Mismatch at tests/source/issue_5686.rs:34:
     #[hell{world}]
     Cobra {/* struct variant close in leading attribute */} = 6,
     Eagle {
-        /* struct variant closer on associated field attribute */
-        #[hell{world}]
-        value: Sting,
+        /* struct variant closer on associated field attribute */ #[hell{world}]value: Sting,
     } = 7,
     Koala {/* struct variant closer on macro call */} = some_macro! {},
 }

Mismatch at tests/source/multiple.rs:105:
 pub struct Foo {
     #[rustfmt::skip]
     f :   SomeType, // Comment beside a field
-    f: SomeType, // Comment beside a field
+    f :   SomeType, // Comment beside a field
     // Comment on a field
     g: SomeOtherType,
     /// A doc comment on a field

Mismatch at tests/source/issue-2869.rs:3:
 #[derive(Serialize, Deserialize, Debug)]
 #[serde(rename_all = "PascalCase")]
---
-    result_status:                     Option<String>,
+    creation_time: String,
+    id: String,
+    operation: String,
+    organization_id: String,
+    record_type: u32,
+    result_status: Option<String>,
     #[serde(rename = "ClientIP")]
-    client_ip:                         Option<IpAddr>,
-    object_id:                         String,
-    actor:                             Option<Vec<IDType>>,
-    actor_context_id:                  Option<String>,
-    actor_ip_address:                  Option<IpAddr>,
+    client_ip: Option<IpAddr>,
+    object_id: String,
+    actor: Option<Vec<IDType>>,
+    actor_context_id: Option<String>,
+    actor_ip_address: Option<IpAddr>,
     azure_active_directory_event_type: Option<u8>,
 
     #[serde(rename = "very")]

Mismatch at tests/source/issue-2869.rs:21:
     aaaaa: String,
---
 struct AuditLog2 {
-    creation_time:                     String,
-    id:                                String,
-    operation:                         String,
-    organization_id:                   String,
-    record_type:                       u32,
-    result_status:                     Option<String>,
-    client_ip:                         Option<IpAddr>,
-    object_id:                         String,
-    actor:                             Option<Vec<IDType>>,
-    actor_context_id:                  Option<String>,
-    actor_ip_address:                  Option<IpAddr>,
+    creation_time: String,
+    id: String,
+    operation: String,
+    organization_id: String,
+    record_type: u32,
+    result_status: Option<String>,
+    client_ip: Option<IpAddr>,
+    object_id: String,
+    actor: Option<Vec<IDType>>,
+    actor_context_id: Option<String>,
+    actor_ip_address: Option<IpAddr>,
     azure_active_directory_event_type: Option<u8>,
 }
 

Mismatch at tests/source/issue-2164.rs:2:
 #[repr(C)]
 #[derive(Debug, Copy, Clone)]
 pub struct emacs_env_25 {
-    pub size: isize,
-    pub private_members: *mut emacs_env_private,
-    pub make_global_ref: ::std::option::Option<

dianqk · 2025-04-07T10:32:34Z

The job x86_64-gnu-tools failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

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

@rustbot author

rustbot · 2025-04-07T10:32:38Z

Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use @rustbot ready.

dianqk · 2025-04-08T14:17:17Z

I should drop other dead store statements or not merging this match:

pub fn foo(b: bool) {
    let _b = (if b { " " } else { "" },);
}

fn foo(_1: bool) -> () {
    debug b => _1;
    let mut _0: ();
    let _2: (&str,);
    let mut _3: &str;
    scope 1 {
        debug _b => _2;
    }

    bb0: {
        switchInt(copy _1) -> [0: bb2, otherwise: bb1];
    }

    bb1: {
        _3 = const " ";
        goto -> bb3;
    }

    bb2: {
        _3 = const "";
        goto -> bb3;
    }

    bb3: {
        _2 = (move _3,);
        return;
    }
}

I'm considering not merging this match.

rustbot assigned nnethercote Sep 3, 2024

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 Sep 3, 2024

rustbot assigned cjgillot and unassigned nnethercote Sep 3, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

dianqk force-pushed the match-br-copy branch from efce2e8 to adb6166 Compare September 3, 2024 14:44

dianqk force-pushed the match-br-copy branch from adb6166 to 622247a Compare September 14, 2024 22:02

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Sep 14, 2024

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 14, 2024

Auto merge of rust-lang#129931 - DianQK:match-br-copy, r=<try>

c324112

Merge these copy statements that simplified the canonical enum clone method by GVN This is blocked by rust-lang#128299.

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Sep 15, 2024

cjgillot reviewed Sep 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

dianqk mentioned this pull request Sep 17, 2024

tests: allow trunc/select instructions to be missing #130454

Merged

rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Sep 18, 2024

dianqk commented Oct 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

dianqk force-pushed the match-br-copy branch from 622247a to dddf046 Compare October 5, 2024 13:18

dianqk changed the title ~~Merge these copy statements that simplified the canonical enum clone method by GVN~~ mir-opt: Merge all branch BBs into a single copy statement Oct 5, 2024

dianqk added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. labels Apr 3, 2025

dianqk force-pushed the match-br-copy branch from 99eed4b to f05d4af Compare April 4, 2025 10:03

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Apr 4, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Apr 4, 2025

cjgillot reviewed Apr 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

dianqk changed the title ~~mir-opt: Merge all branch BBs into a single copy statement~~ mir-opt: Ignore the dead store statements in MatchBranchSimplification Apr 6, 2025

dianqk force-pushed the match-br-copy branch from f05d4af to 543cf86 Compare April 6, 2025 11:52

rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Apr 6, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

dianqk added 3 commits April 6, 2025 20:40

mir-opt: Use one MirPatch in MatchBranchSimplification

796e760

mir-opt: run MatchBranchSimplification after GVN

5638bd3

mir-opt: ignore dead store stmts in MatchBranchSimplification

c91a07a

dianqk force-pushed the match-br-copy branch from 543cf86 to c91a07a Compare April 6, 2025 12:40

rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Apr 7, 2025

mir-opt: Ignore the dead store statements in MatchBranchSimplification #129931

Are you sure you want to change the base?

mir-opt: Ignore the dead store statements in MatchBranchSimplification #129931

Conversation

dianqk commented Sep 3, 2024 • edited Loading

rustbot commented Sep 3, 2024

dianqk commented Sep 3, 2024

rustbot commented Sep 3, 2024

dianqk commented Sep 3, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Sep 14, 2024

dianqk commented Sep 14, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Sep 14, 2024

bors commented Sep 14, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Sep 15, 2024

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

cjgillot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dianqk commented Sep 18, 2024

dianqk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dianqk commented Apr 4, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Apr 4, 2025

bors commented Apr 4, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Apr 4, 2025

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dianqk commented Apr 6, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

rust-log-analyzer commented Apr 6, 2025

dianqk commented Apr 7, 2025

rustbot commented Apr 7, 2025

dianqk commented Apr 8, 2025

dianqk commented Sep 3, 2024 •

edited

Loading