Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance. by nnethercote · Pull Request #112128 · rust-lang/rust

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:47Z

We record inlining status for mono items in MonoItems, and then transfer it to InliningMap, for later use in
InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates.

But we can just compute inlining status directly in InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance.

This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for MonoItems and InliningMap::inlines. This does result in more calls to instantiation_mode (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

r? @wesleywiser

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:56Z

I expect this to have no perf impact, but let's check.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-05-31T06:49:06Z

⌛ Trying commit 9571d670c36e1e17f3b2351c11fa8cc539260e35 with merge cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d...

SparrowLii · 2023-05-31T06:55:10Z

This is very nice if it has little perf impact

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

rust-timer · 2023-05-31T10:57:49Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d): 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)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.4%	[-4.4%, -4.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 643.402s -> 642.265s (-0.18%)

We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T11:54:42Z

No perf impact. @wesleywiser, ready for review, thanks!

@bors rollup

wesleywiser

Very nice!

wesleywiser · 2023-06-01T00:08:53Z

@bors r+

bors · 2023-06-01T00:08:54Z

📌 Commit cc21d9a has been approved by wesleywiser

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…=wesleywiser Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance. We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible. r? `@wesleywiser`

Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#108459 (rustdoc: Fix LinkReplacer link matching) - rust-lang#111318 (Add a distinct `OperandValue::ZeroSized` variant for ZSTs) - rust-lang#111892 (rustdoc: add interaction delays for tooltip popovers) - rust-lang#111980 (Preserve substs in opaques recorded in typeck results) - rust-lang#112024 (Don't suggest break through nested items) - rust-lang#112128 (Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance.) - rust-lang#112141 (remove reference to Into in ? operator core/std docs, fixrust-lang#111655) Failed merges: - rust-lang#112071 (Group rfcs tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:47Z

We record inlining status for mono items in MonoItems, and then transfer it to InliningMap, for later use in
InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates.

But we can just compute inlining status directly in InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance.

This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for MonoItems and InliningMap::inlines. This does result in more calls to instantiation_mode (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

r? @wesleywiser

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:56Z

I expect this to have no perf impact, but let's check.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-05-31T06:49:06Z

⌛ Trying commit 9571d670c36e1e17f3b2351c11fa8cc539260e35 with merge cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d...

SparrowLii · 2023-05-31T06:55:10Z

This is very nice if it has little perf impact

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

rust-timer · 2023-05-31T10:57:49Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d): 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)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.4%	[-4.4%, -4.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 643.402s -> 642.265s (-0.18%)

We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T11:54:42Z

No perf impact. @wesleywiser, ready for review, thanks!

@bors rollup

wesleywiser

Very nice!

wesleywiser · 2023-06-01T00:08:53Z

@bors r+

bors · 2023-06-01T00:08:54Z

📌 Commit cc21d9a has been approved by wesleywiser

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…=wesleywiser Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance. We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible. r? `@wesleywiser`

Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#108459 (rustdoc: Fix LinkReplacer link matching) - rust-lang#111318 (Add a distinct `OperandValue::ZeroSized` variant for ZSTs) - rust-lang#111892 (rustdoc: add interaction delays for tooltip popovers) - rust-lang#111980 (Preserve substs in opaques recorded in typeck results) - rust-lang#112024 (Don't suggest break through nested items) - rust-lang#112128 (Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance.) - rust-lang#112141 (remove reference to Into in ? operator core/std docs, fixrust-lang#111655) Failed merges: - rust-lang#112071 (Group rfcs tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:47Z

We record inlining status for mono items in MonoItems, and then transfer it to InliningMap, for later use in
InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates.

But we can just compute inlining status directly in InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance.

This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for MonoItems and InliningMap::inlines. This does result in more calls to instantiation_mode (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

r? @wesleywiser

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:56Z

I expect this to have no perf impact, but let's check.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-05-31T06:49:06Z

⌛ Trying commit 9571d670c36e1e17f3b2351c11fa8cc539260e35 with merge cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d...

SparrowLii · 2023-05-31T06:55:10Z

This is very nice if it has little perf impact

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

rust-timer · 2023-05-31T10:57:49Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d): 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)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.4%	[-4.4%, -4.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 643.402s -> 642.265s (-0.18%)

We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T11:54:42Z

No perf impact. @wesleywiser, ready for review, thanks!

@bors rollup

wesleywiser

Very nice!

wesleywiser · 2023-06-01T00:08:53Z

@bors r+

bors · 2023-06-01T00:08:54Z

📌 Commit cc21d9a has been approved by wesleywiser

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…=wesleywiser Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance. We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible. r? `@wesleywiser`

Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#108459 (rustdoc: Fix LinkReplacer link matching) - rust-lang#111318 (Add a distinct `OperandValue::ZeroSized` variant for ZSTs) - rust-lang#111892 (rustdoc: add interaction delays for tooltip popovers) - rust-lang#111980 (Preserve substs in opaques recorded in typeck results) - rust-lang#112024 (Don't suggest break through nested items) - rust-lang#112128 (Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance.) - rust-lang#112141 (remove reference to Into in ? operator core/std docs, fixrust-lang#111655) Failed merges: - rust-lang#112071 (Group rfcs tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:47Z

We record inlining status for mono items in MonoItems, and then transfer it to InliningMap, for later use in
InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates.

But we can just compute inlining status directly in InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance.

This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for MonoItems and InliningMap::inlines. This does result in more calls to instantiation_mode (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

r? @wesleywiser

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:56Z

I expect this to have no perf impact, but let's check.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-05-31T06:49:06Z

⌛ Trying commit 9571d670c36e1e17f3b2351c11fa8cc539260e35 with merge cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d...

SparrowLii · 2023-05-31T06:55:10Z

This is very nice if it has little perf impact

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

rust-timer · 2023-05-31T10:57:49Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d): 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)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.4%	[-4.4%, -4.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 643.402s -> 642.265s (-0.18%)

We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T11:54:42Z

No perf impact. @wesleywiser, ready for review, thanks!

@bors rollup

wesleywiser

Very nice!

wesleywiser · 2023-06-01T00:08:53Z

@bors r+

bors · 2023-06-01T00:08:54Z

📌 Commit cc21d9a has been approved by wesleywiser

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…=wesleywiser Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance. We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible. r? `@wesleywiser`

Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#108459 (rustdoc: Fix LinkReplacer link matching) - rust-lang#111318 (Add a distinct `OperandValue::ZeroSized` variant for ZSTs) - rust-lang#111892 (rustdoc: add interaction delays for tooltip popovers) - rust-lang#111980 (Preserve substs in opaques recorded in typeck results) - rust-lang#112024 (Don't suggest break through nested items) - rust-lang#112128 (Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance.) - rust-lang#112141 (remove reference to Into in ? operator core/std docs, fixrust-lang#111655) Failed merges: - rust-lang#112071 (Group rfcs tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:47Z

We record inlining status for mono items in MonoItems, and then transfer it to InliningMap, for later use in
InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates.

But we can just compute inlining status directly in InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance.

This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for MonoItems and InliningMap::inlines. This does result in more calls to instantiation_mode (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

r? @wesleywiser

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:56Z

I expect this to have no perf impact, but let's check.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-05-31T06:49:06Z

⌛ Trying commit 9571d670c36e1e17f3b2351c11fa8cc539260e35 with merge cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d...

SparrowLii · 2023-05-31T06:55:10Z

This is very nice if it has little perf impact

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

rust-timer · 2023-05-31T10:57:49Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d): 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)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.4%	[-4.4%, -4.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 643.402s -> 642.265s (-0.18%)

We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T11:54:42Z

No perf impact. @wesleywiser, ready for review, thanks!

@bors rollup

wesleywiser

Very nice!

wesleywiser · 2023-06-01T00:08:53Z

@bors r+

bors · 2023-06-01T00:08:54Z

📌 Commit cc21d9a has been approved by wesleywiser

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…=wesleywiser Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance. We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible. r? `@wesleywiser`

Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#108459 (rustdoc: Fix LinkReplacer link matching) - rust-lang#111318 (Add a distinct `OperandValue::ZeroSized` variant for ZSTs) - rust-lang#111892 (rustdoc: add interaction delays for tooltip popovers) - rust-lang#111980 (Preserve substs in opaques recorded in typeck results) - rust-lang#112024 (Don't suggest break through nested items) - rust-lang#112128 (Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance.) - rust-lang#112141 (remove reference to Into in ? operator core/std docs, fixrust-lang#111655) Failed merges: - rust-lang#112071 (Group rfcs tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:47Z

We record inlining status for mono items in MonoItems, and then transfer it to InliningMap, for later use in
InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates.

But we can just compute inlining status directly in InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance.

This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for MonoItems and InliningMap::inlines. This does result in more calls to instantiation_mode (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

r? @wesleywiser

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:56Z

I expect this to have no perf impact, but let's check.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-05-31T06:49:06Z

⌛ Trying commit 9571d670c36e1e17f3b2351c11fa8cc539260e35 with merge cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d...

SparrowLii · 2023-05-31T06:55:10Z

This is very nice if it has little perf impact

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

rust-timer · 2023-05-31T10:57:49Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d): 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)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.4%	[-4.4%, -4.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 643.402s -> 642.265s (-0.18%)

We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T11:54:42Z

No perf impact. @wesleywiser, ready for review, thanks!

@bors rollup

wesleywiser

Very nice!

wesleywiser · 2023-06-01T00:08:53Z

@bors r+

bors · 2023-06-01T00:08:54Z

📌 Commit cc21d9a has been approved by wesleywiser

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…=wesleywiser Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance. We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible. r? `@wesleywiser`

Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#108459 (rustdoc: Fix LinkReplacer link matching) - rust-lang#111318 (Add a distinct `OperandValue::ZeroSized` variant for ZSTs) - rust-lang#111892 (rustdoc: add interaction delays for tooltip popovers) - rust-lang#111980 (Preserve substs in opaques recorded in typeck results) - rust-lang#112024 (Don't suggest break through nested items) - rust-lang#112128 (Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance.) - rust-lang#112141 (remove reference to Into in ? operator core/std docs, fixrust-lang#111655) Failed merges: - rust-lang#112071 (Group rfcs tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:47Z

We record inlining status for mono items in MonoItems, and then transfer it to InliningMap, for later use in
InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates.

But we can just compute inlining status directly in InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance.

This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for MonoItems and InliningMap::inlines. This does result in more calls to instantiation_mode (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

r? @wesleywiser

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:56Z

I expect this to have no perf impact, but let's check.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-05-31T06:49:06Z

⌛ Trying commit 9571d670c36e1e17f3b2351c11fa8cc539260e35 with merge cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d...

SparrowLii · 2023-05-31T06:55:10Z

This is very nice if it has little perf impact

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

rust-timer · 2023-05-31T10:57:49Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d): 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)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.4%	[-4.4%, -4.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 643.402s -> 642.265s (-0.18%)

We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T11:54:42Z

No perf impact. @wesleywiser, ready for review, thanks!

@bors rollup

wesleywiser

Very nice!

wesleywiser · 2023-06-01T00:08:53Z

@bors r+

bors · 2023-06-01T00:08:54Z

📌 Commit cc21d9a has been approved by wesleywiser

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…=wesleywiser Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance. We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible. r? `@wesleywiser`

Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#108459 (rustdoc: Fix LinkReplacer link matching) - rust-lang#111318 (Add a distinct `OperandValue::ZeroSized` variant for ZSTs) - rust-lang#111892 (rustdoc: add interaction delays for tooltip popovers) - rust-lang#111980 (Preserve substs in opaques recorded in typeck results) - rust-lang#112024 (Don't suggest break through nested items) - rust-lang#112128 (Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance.) - rust-lang#112141 (remove reference to Into in ? operator core/std docs, fixrust-lang#111655) Failed merges: - rust-lang#112071 (Group rfcs tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:47Z

We record inlining status for mono items in MonoItems, and then transfer it to InliningMap, for later use in
InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates.

But we can just compute inlining status directly in InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance.

This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for MonoItems and InliningMap::inlines. This does result in more calls to instantiation_mode (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

r? @wesleywiser

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T06:48:56Z

I expect this to have no perf impact, but let's check.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-05-31T06:49:06Z

⌛ Trying commit 9571d670c36e1e17f3b2351c11fa8cc539260e35 with merge cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d...

SparrowLii · 2023-05-31T06:55:10Z

This is very nice if it has little perf impact

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

bors · 2023-05-31T08:58:05Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d)

rust-timer · 2023-05-31T10:57:49Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cc638c2ed8ff2a74362f50eb1e9467496484182d): 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)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.4%	[-4.4%, -4.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.5%	[5.5%, 5.5%]	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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 643.402s -> 642.265s (-0.18%)

We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible.

nnethercote · 2023-05-31T11:54:42Z

No perf impact. @wesleywiser, ready for review, thanks!

@bors rollup

wesleywiser

Very nice!

wesleywiser · 2023-06-01T00:08:53Z

@bors r+

bors · 2023-06-01T00:08:54Z

📌 Commit cc21d9a has been approved by wesleywiser

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…=wesleywiser Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance. We record inlining status for mono items in `MonoItems`, and then transfer it to `InliningMap`, for later use in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`. But we can just compute inlining status directly in `InliningMap::with_inlining_candidates`, because the mono item is right there. There's no need to compute it in advance. This commit changes the code to do that, removing the need for `MonoItems` and `InliningMap::inlines`. This does result in more calls to `instantiation_mode` (one per static occurrence) but the performance effect is negligible. r? `@wesleywiser`

Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#108459 (rustdoc: Fix LinkReplacer link matching) - rust-lang#111318 (Add a distinct `OperandValue::ZeroSized` variant for ZSTs) - rust-lang#111892 (rustdoc: add interaction delays for tooltip popovers) - rust-lang#111980 (Preserve substs in opaques recorded in typeck results) - rust-lang#112024 (Don't suggest break through nested items) - rust-lang#112128 (Don't compute inlining status of mono items in advance.) - rust-lang#112141 (remove reference to Into in ? operator core/std docs, fixrust-lang#111655) Failed merges: - rust-lang#112071 (Group rfcs tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

rustbot assigned wesleywiser May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote mentioned this pull request May 31, 2023
Remove MonoItems. #112126
Closed

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote force-pushed the no-inlining-advance branch from 9571d67 to cc21d9aCompare May 31, 2023 11:53

wesleywiser approved these changes Jun 1, 2023
View reviewed changes

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 Jun 1, 2023

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112159
Closed

Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112164
Merged

bors merged commit fe12323 into rust-lang:masterJun 1, 2023

rustbot added this to the 1.72.0 milestone Jun 1, 2023

nnethercote deleted the no-inlining-advance branch June 1, 2023 22:43

rustbot assigned wesleywiser May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote mentioned this pull request May 31, 2023
Remove MonoItems. #112126
Closed

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote force-pushed the no-inlining-advance branch from 9571d67 to cc21d9aCompare May 31, 2023 11:53

wesleywiser approved these changes Jun 1, 2023
View reviewed changes

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 Jun 1, 2023

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112159
Closed

Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112164
Merged

bors merged commit fe12323 into rust-lang:masterJun 1, 2023

rustbot added this to the 1.72.0 milestone Jun 1, 2023

nnethercote deleted the no-inlining-advance branch June 1, 2023 22:43

rustbot assigned wesleywiser May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote mentioned this pull request May 31, 2023
Remove MonoItems. #112126
Closed

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote force-pushed the no-inlining-advance branch from 9571d67 to cc21d9aCompare May 31, 2023 11:53

wesleywiser approved these changes Jun 1, 2023
View reviewed changes

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 Jun 1, 2023

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112159
Closed

Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112164
Merged

bors merged commit fe12323 into rust-lang:masterJun 1, 2023

rustbot added this to the 1.72.0 milestone Jun 1, 2023

nnethercote deleted the no-inlining-advance branch June 1, 2023 22:43

rustbot assigned wesleywiser May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote mentioned this pull request May 31, 2023
Remove MonoItems. #112126
Closed

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote force-pushed the no-inlining-advance branch from 9571d67 to cc21d9aCompare May 31, 2023 11:53

wesleywiser approved these changes Jun 1, 2023
View reviewed changes

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 Jun 1, 2023

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112159
Closed

Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112164
Merged

bors merged commit fe12323 into rust-lang:masterJun 1, 2023

rustbot added this to the 1.72.0 milestone Jun 1, 2023

nnethercote deleted the no-inlining-advance branch June 1, 2023 22:43

rustbot assigned wesleywiser May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote mentioned this pull request May 31, 2023
Remove MonoItems. #112126
Closed

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote force-pushed the no-inlining-advance branch from 9571d67 to cc21d9aCompare May 31, 2023 11:53

wesleywiser approved these changes Jun 1, 2023
View reviewed changes

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 Jun 1, 2023

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112159
Closed

Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112164
Merged

bors merged commit fe12323 into rust-lang:masterJun 1, 2023

rustbot added this to the 1.72.0 milestone Jun 1, 2023

nnethercote deleted the no-inlining-advance branch June 1, 2023 22:43

rustbot assigned wesleywiser May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote mentioned this pull request May 31, 2023
Remove MonoItems. #112126
Closed

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote force-pushed the no-inlining-advance branch from 9571d67 to cc21d9aCompare May 31, 2023 11:53

wesleywiser approved these changes Jun 1, 2023
View reviewed changes

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 Jun 1, 2023

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112159
Closed

Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112164
Merged

bors merged commit fe12323 into rust-lang:masterJun 1, 2023

rustbot added this to the 1.72.0 milestone Jun 1, 2023

nnethercote deleted the no-inlining-advance branch June 1, 2023 22:43

rustbot assigned wesleywiser May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote mentioned this pull request May 31, 2023
Remove MonoItems. #112126
Closed

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote force-pushed the no-inlining-advance branch from 9571d67 to cc21d9aCompare May 31, 2023 11:53

wesleywiser approved these changes Jun 1, 2023
View reviewed changes

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 Jun 1, 2023

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112159
Closed

Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112164
Merged

bors merged commit fe12323 into rust-lang:masterJun 1, 2023

rustbot added this to the 1.72.0 milestone Jun 1, 2023

nnethercote deleted the no-inlining-advance branch June 1, 2023 22:43

rustbot assigned wesleywiser May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote mentioned this pull request May 31, 2023
Remove MonoItems. #112126
Closed

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 May 31, 2023

nnethercote force-pushed the no-inlining-advance branch from 9571d67 to cc21d9aCompare May 31, 2023 11:53

wesleywiser approved these changes Jun 1, 2023
View reviewed changes

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 Jun 1, 2023

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112159
Closed

Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112164
Merged

bors merged commit fe12323 into rust-lang:masterJun 1, 2023

rustbot added this to the 1.72.0 milestone Jun 1, 2023

nnethercote deleted the no-inlining-advance branch June 1, 2023 22:43

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

nnethercote commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented May 31, 2023• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

SparrowLii commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

bors commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

bors commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented May 31, 2023

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

wesleywiser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

wesleywiser commented Jun 1, 2023

Uh oh!

bors commented Jun 1, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

nnethercote commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented May 31, 2023• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

SparrowLii commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

bors commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

bors commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented May 31, 2023

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

wesleywiser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

wesleywiser commented Jun 1, 2023

Uh oh!

bors commented Jun 1, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented May 31, 2023•
edited
Loading

nnethercote commented May 31, 2023•
edited
Loading

nnethercote commented May 31, 2023•
edited
Loading