Improve android-ndk property interface

[pcc]

Re-creating #102994 which was closed.

---

PR #105716 added support for NDK r25b, and removed support for r15. Since the switch to r25b would have broken existing r15 users anyway, let's take the opportunity to make the interface more user friendly.

Firstly move the android-ndk property to [build] instead of the targets. This is possible now that the NDK has obsoleted the concept of target-specific toolchains.

Also make the property take the NDK root directory instead of the "toolchains/llvm/prebuilt/" subdirectory.

[rustbot]

r? @onur-ozkan

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

[rustbot]

This PR changes config.example.toml. If appropriate, please also update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/lib.rs and change-id in config.example.toml.

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_cranelift

cc @bjorn3

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc

cc @antoyo

[pcc]

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

Previously approved on the previous PR modulo the changelog update. I've switched to the new method of notifying users of config breakage.

cc @chriswailes@jyn514@slanterns@JohnCSimon@Dylan-DPC

[onur-ozkan]

You don't need to change all of change-ids exists in the rust source.

Please revert the following changes:

[onur-ozkan]

Just saw this #115898 (comment).

You don't need to change all of change-ids exists in the rust source.

Please revert the following changes:

I suppose that changes necessary because tests have started failing?

[bjorn3]

You don't need to change all of change-ids exists in the rust source.

You would get a warning otherwise, right?

[onur-ozkan]

You don't need to change all of change-ids exists in the rust source.

You would get a warning otherwise, right?

Yes.

[rustbot]

This PR modifies src/bootstrap/src/core/config. If appropriate, please also update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/lib.rs and change-id in config.example.toml.

[pcc]

Reverted all requested change-id changes.

[onur-ozkan]

@bors r+ rollup=never (to ensure that we can easily revert in case there are any issues we missed identifying during the review)

[bors]

📌 Commit aad44b3 has been approved by onur-ozkan

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit aad44b3 with merge f1a5ce1...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: onur-ozkan
Pushing f1a5ce1 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (f1a5ce1): 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)	3.9%	[3.9%, 3.9%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.9%	[3.9%, 3.9%]	1

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)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
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)	3.5%	[3.5%, 3.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.5%	[3.5%, 3.5%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: missing data
Artifact size: 304.35 MiB -> 304.36 MiB (0.00%)

[lqd]

syn opt is currently being noisy

[onur-ozkan]

If the reason is unknown, we can revert the PR (with #117117) for now and reintroduce it with the regression fix later. These days I am moving my apartment and don't have the time to investigate this.

[lqd]

The reason of the regression you mean? I believe it is noise and not a real regression. This benchmark is being noisy on other PRs, and usually has a threshold higher than the current one.

[onur-ozkan]

Oh I see. Not related with this PR then?

[lqd]

That’s right

[lqd]

Here's syn opt right now. You can see on the left graph the same noise happening to other PRs.

It's unfortunately not as noisy as it used to be: the rate of its usual ± 4% swings has somehow slowed down recently, it's been less noisy than usual and the threshold is down to 1.7%. (which may have started calming down after the llvm 17.0.3 update)

The threshold should adjust quickly and stop reporting this as a regression if the new behavior is not as erratic.

In the meantime, @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged