Skip to content

Conversation

jhpratt
Copy link
Member

@jhpratt jhpratt commented Apr 11, 2025

Successful merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

scottmcm and others added 20 commits March 1, 2025 13:06
This way it can use the nice new LLVM intrinsic in LLVM20.
No need to convert the `DefKind` to `DefPathData`, they're very similar
types.
PR rust-lang#137977 changed `DefPathData::TypeNs` to contain `Option<Symbol>` to
account for RPITIT assoc types being anonymous. This commit changes it
back to `Symbol` and gives anonymous assoc types their own variant. It
makes things a bit nicer overall.
Give them their own symbol `anon_assoc`, as is done for all the other
anonymous `DefPathData` variants.
Use `BinOp::Cmp` for `iNN::signum`

This way it can use the nice new LLVM intrinsic in LLVM20.
…etrochenkov

Avoid a reverse map that is only used in diagnostics paths

r? `@petrochenkov`

iterating a map until a value matches and returning the key is bad obviously, but it happens very rarely and only on diagnostics paths. It would also be a lot cheaper with rust-lang#138995. Which is actually why I'm trying this out, that PR adds a new entry in `create_def`, which makes `create_def` show up in cachegrind. So I'm trying out if removing adding an entry in `create_def` is a perf improvement
…plify/cleanup, r=oli-obk

Cleanup the `InstSimplify` MIR transformation

Some minor cleanups and rightward-drift-protection found while working on rust-lang#139411 and a future follow-up
…nkov

Handle a negated literal in `eat_token_lit`.

Fixes rust-lang#139495.

r? `@petrochenkov`
…ompiler-errors

Tweak `DefPathData`

Some improvements in and around `DefPathData`, following on from rust-lang#137977.

r? `@spastorino`
Reuse address-space computation from global alloc

r? `@RalfJung`

just avoiding some minor duplication
…ion, r=Urgau

Add spastorino to users_on_vacation
@rustbot rustbot added A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself PG-exploit-mitigations Project group: Exploit mitigations 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. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Apr 11, 2025
@jhpratt
Copy link
Member Author

jhpratt commented Apr 11, 2025

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 11, 2025

📌 Commit c8992c9 has been approved by jhpratt

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 Apr 11, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 11, 2025

⌛ Testing commit c8992c9 with merge d2b3dd7...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 11, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jhpratt
Pushing d2b3dd7 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Apr 11, 2025
@bors bors merged commit d2b3dd7 into rust-lang:master Apr 11, 2025
1 check passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.88.0 milestone Apr 11, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

What is this? This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing ed3a4aa (parent) -> d2b3dd7 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 318 test diffs

Stage 1

  • [ui] tests/ui/macros/reparse-expr-issue-139495.rs: [missing] -> pass (J1)

Stage 2

  • [ui] tests/ui/macros/reparse-expr-issue-139495.rs: [missing] -> pass (J0)

Additionally, 316 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Job group index

Job duration changes

  1. dist-aarch64-linux: 5504.5s -> 7621.0s (38.5%)
  2. x86_64-apple-1: 7607.2s -> 9842.4s (29.4%)
  3. x86_64-apple-2: 5038.7s -> 3955.0s (-21.5%)
  4. aarch64-apple: 4315.9s -> 3791.6s (-12.1%)
  5. x86_64-msvc-1: 8687.9s -> 9525.9s (9.6%)
  6. dist-x86_64-msvc: 5942.3s -> 6440.1s (8.4%)
  7. dist-x86_64-mingw: 8116.6s -> 7564.2s (-6.8%)
  8. dist-x86_64-linux: 5140.2s -> 5468.5s (6.4%)
  9. dist-aarch64-apple: 4916.3s -> 4609.3s (-6.2%)
  10. dist-loongarch64-linux: 6645.2s -> 6338.9s (-4.6%)
How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Message Perf Build Sha
#137835 Use BinOp::Cmp for iNN::signum a9c4f37571986ad90ab452ac4ee99f5139d2fd3c (link)
#139584 Avoid a reverse map that is only used in diagnostics paths 40b73e94cdad24851f95a8eb4304535401e1b8d6 (link)
#139638 Cleanup the InstSimplify MIR transformation acbda69db321073c754fbb19118de23bfae695eb (link)
#139653 Handle a negated literal in eat_token_lit. 42ab03a77be92475fb036b339a157e5af9f9159c (link)
#139662 Tweak DefPathData f6d1242ac2152329d49ed1e53bfb68a3c8724b80 (link)
#139664 Reuse address-space computation from global alloc accee9cafd810c46d7658e6cc054b08996d1da67 (link)
#139687 Add spastorino to users_on_vacation 60ae45be1e0f4ebcf3773641059b4250ec6334c9 (link)

previous master: ed3a4aac81

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (d2b3dd7): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -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
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.6% [0.6%, 0.6%] 3
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.8%, secondary -0.2%)

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)
3.1% [3.1%, 3.1%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.0% [1.9%, 3.5%] 5
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-4.3% [-6.4%, -3.1%] 4
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.9% [-4.1%, -1.5%] 6
All ❌✅ (primary) -2.8% [-6.4%, 3.1%] 5

Cycles

Results (primary 2.0%, secondary 3.6%)

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)
2.0% [1.1%, 3.0%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.6% [3.6%, 3.6%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.0% [1.1%, 3.0%] 2

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
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.1% [-0.2%, -0.0%] 69
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.2%, -0.0%] 30
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.1% [-0.2%, -0.0%] 69

Bootstrap: 779.659s -> 782.643s (0.38%)
Artifact size: 365.50 MiB -> 365.51 MiB (0.00%)

@jhpratt jhpratt deleted the rollup-wlkdyjg branch May 29, 2025 20:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. PG-exploit-mitigations Project group: Exploit mitigations rollup A PR which is a rollup 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. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants