Skip to content

Fast path for register_region_obligation - #141129

Merged
bors merged 1 commit into
rust-lang:masterfrom
compiler-errors:register-region-obl
May 18, 2025
Merged

Fast path for register_region_obligation#141129
bors merged 1 commit into
rust-lang:masterfrom
compiler-errors:register-region-obl

Conversation

@compiler-errors

@compiler-errorscompiler-errors commented May 17, 2025•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

If a type has no params, infer, placeholder, or non-'static free regions, then we can skip registering outlives obligations since the type has no components which affect lifetime checking in an interesting way.

@rustbotrustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label May 17, 2025
@compiler-errors

compiler-errors commented May 17, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rustbotrustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label May 17, 2025
@bors

bors commented May 17, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

⌛ Trying commit 83d8e03 with merge d04c987...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 17, 2025
@bors
Auto merge ofrust-lang#141129- compiler-errors:register-region-obl,…
d04c987
… r=<try>
Fast path for `register_region_obligation`
r? `@ghost`
@bors

bors commented May 17, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: d04c987 (d04c9870ee2261756aec64f0cdefa09dc0581231)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-timer

rust-timer commented May 17, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (d04c987): 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.

meanrangecount
Regressions ❌
(primary)		1.0%[1.0%, 1.0%]1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		--0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		-0.2%[-0.3%, -0.1%]29
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		-0.2%[-0.5%, -0.0%]13
All ❌✅ (primary)-0.2%[-0.3%, 1.0%]30

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.2%, secondary 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.

meanrangecount
Regressions ❌
(primary)		3.0%[3.0%, 3.0%]1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		2.6%[1.6%, 3.7%]10
Improvements ✅
(primary)		-1.7%[-2.6%, -1.0%]10
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		-1.1%[-1.7%, -0.6%]9
All ❌✅ (primary)-1.2%[-2.6%, 3.0%]11

Cycles

Results (secondary -0.7%)

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.

meanrangecount
Regressions ❌
(primary)		--0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		0.5%[0.5%, 0.5%]2
Improvements ✅
(primary)		--0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		-1.0%[-2.7%, -0.4%]8
All ❌✅ (primary)--0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 775.66s -> 776.299s (0.08%)
Artifact size: 365.38 MiB -> 365.29 MiB (-0.02%)

@rustbotrustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels May 17, 2025
@compiler-errors

compiler-errors commented May 17, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

r? @lcnr or @oli-obk

@compiler-errors
compiler-errors marked this pull request as ready for review May 17, 2025 19:31
@rustbotrustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label May 17, 2025
@compiler-errors

compiler-errors commented May 17, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

This is marked as "perf regression" but it only regresses on nalgebra, which has been super bimodal recently afaict.

@oli-obk

oli-obk commented May 18, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@bors r+

@bors

bors commented May 18, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

📌 Commit 98cdb82 has been approved by oli-obk

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@borsbors 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 May 18, 2025
@bors

bors commented May 18, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

⌛ Testing commit 98cdb82 with merge 7205fc5...

@bors

bors commented May 18, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing 7205fc5 to master...

@borsbors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label May 18, 2025
@bors
bors merged commit 7205fc5 into rust-lang:masterMay 18, 2025
@rustbotrustbot added this to the 1.89.0 milestone May 18, 2025
@github-actions

github-actionsBot commented May 18, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
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 ae3b909 (parent) -> 7205fc5 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 1 test diff

Stage 2

  • [run-make] tests/run-make/compressed-debuginfo-zstd: ignore (ignored if LLVM wasn't build with zstd for ELF section compression (we want LLVM/LLD to be built with zstd support)) -> pass (J0)

Job group index

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
test-dashboard 7205fc537d0fe8c3c2560b313e54fcb91ab6f3d1 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

  1. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 3986.9s -> 2561.0s (-35.8%)
  2. dist-aarch64-linux: 5552.0s -> 7517.0s (35.4%)
  3. mingw-check: 1811.3s -> 1234.2s (-31.9%)
  4. armhf-gnu: 6148.3s -> 4454.5s (-27.5%)
  5. test-various: 5648.0s -> 4194.6s (-25.7%)
  6. x86_64-gnu: 8363.9s -> 6226.2s (-25.6%)
  7. x86_64-gnu-nopt: 7261.3s -> 5471.8s (-24.6%)
  8. x86_64-gnu-stable: 8702.2s -> 6579.4s (-24.4%)
  9. x86_64-gnu-aux: 7796.2s -> 5985.4s (-23.2%)
  10. x86_64-gnu-tools: 7645.3s -> 6028.5s (-21.1%)
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.

@compiler-errors
compiler-errors deleted the register-region-obl branch May 18, 2025 12:37
@rust-timer

rust-timer commented May 18, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (7205fc5): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - 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.

meanrangecount
Regressions ❌
(primary)		--0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		--0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		-0.2%[-0.3%, -0.1%]30
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		-0.5%[-1.0%, -0.0%]12
All ❌✅ (primary)-0.2%[-0.3%, -0.1%]30

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.8%, secondary -0.7%)

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.

meanrangecount
Regressions ❌
(primary)		--0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		4.1%[1.0%, 7.3%]4
Improvements ✅
(primary)		-2.8%[-6.0%, -1.0%]8
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		-1.8%[-3.1%, -0.5%]17
All ❌✅ (primary)-2.8%[-6.0%, -1.0%]8

Cycles

Results (secondary -1.1%)

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.

meanrangecount
Regressions ❌
(primary)		--0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		--0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		--0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		-1.1%[-1.8%, -0.5%]11
All ❌✅ (primary)--0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 777.393s -> 777.426s (0.00%)
Artifact size: 365.45 MiB -> 365.44 MiB (-0.00%)

@rustbotrustbot removed the perf-regression Performance regression. label May 18, 2025
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

@lcnrlcnr

Labels

merged-by-borsThis PR was explicitly merged by bors.S-waiting-on-borsStatus: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.T-compilerRelevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

1.89.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@compiler-errors@rust-timer@bors@oli-obk@lcnr@rustbot