Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Revert "Compare tagged/niche-filling layout and pick the best one" - #74611
Conversation
Mark-Simulacrum
commented
Jul 22, 2020
We can re-land this PR at a later point if there's a way to recover the perf regression here, but given the pretty large variety of performance regressions over the last week it seems good to eagerly revert this to be better able to evaluate the new version. @bors rollup=never |
eddyb
commented
Jul 22, 2020
Oh wow that's definitely much larger than just computing both layouts was (then again I didn't use @bors r+ |
bors
commented
Jul 22, 2020
|
bors
commented
Jul 22, 2020
📌 Commit 1d68600 has been approved by |
nnethercote
commented
Jul 22, 2020
@bors rollup=never Due to perf effects. |
bors
commented
Jul 22, 2020
⌛ Testing commit 1d68600 with merge f4c6964303040a7712afce36bfe89c3663a032ae... |
bors
commented
Jul 22, 2020
💔 Test failed - checks-azure |
Mark-Simulacrum
commented
Jul 22, 2020
@bors retry - error inflating zlib |
bors
commented
Jul 23, 2020
bors
commented
Jul 23, 2020
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions, checks-azure |
…ercote Reland rust-lang#74069 Investigation in rust-lang#74716 has concluded that this PR is indeed not a regression (and in fact the rollup itself is not either). This reverts the revert in rust-lang#74611. r? @nnethercote cc @eddyb
Reverts #74069. It caused a performance regression, see #74069 (comment). perf: https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=d3df8512d2c2afc6d2e7d8b5b951dd7f2ad77b02&end=cfade73820883adf654fe34fd6b0b03a99458a51
r? @eddyb
cc @nnethercote