Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Move HIR parenting information out of hir_owner - #83114
Conversation
cjgillot
commented
Mar 14, 2021
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
rust-timer
commented
Mar 14, 2021
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
bors
commented
Mar 14, 2021
⌛ Trying commit c7c7d09b0353f3497678ac8ec32cad918b81f837 with merge 2f4b1b626e8b2095543ef80fa81b59c78514040c... |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bors
commented
Mar 14, 2021
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
rust-timer
commented
Mar 14, 2021
Queued 2f4b1b626e8b2095543ef80fa81b59c78514040c with parent 84c08f8, future comparison URL. |
rust-timer
commented
Mar 14, 2021
Finished benchmarking try commit (2f4b1b626e8b2095543ef80fa81b59c78514040c): comparison url. Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up. @bors rollup=never |
ec39552 to
aa95531Comparecjgillot
commented
Mar 16, 2021
rustbot did not assign anybody. |
petrochenkov
commented
Mar 16, 2021
I think it's better to r? @michaelwoerister on this. |
bors
commented
Mar 17, 2021
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #83225) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This seems fine to me, I think, if it's not a significant performance loss.
bors
commented
Mar 25, 2021
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #83424) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
8b8f666 to
6ee60e6Comparebors
commented
Mar 29, 2021
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #83185) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
b56c313 to
beea995Comparebors
commented
Apr 29, 2021
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #84233) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
eddyb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
r=me (not 100% on the incremental aspects, but it looks like the bulk of the changes account for the reshuffling of the data representation, and shouldn't change behavior outside of increasing incremental precision)
varkor
commented
May 1, 2021
@bors r=eddyb |
bors
commented
May 1, 2021
📌 Commit d794cb0 has been approved by |
Aaron1011
commented
May 1, 2021
It looks like this is a regression on several benchmarks - is there anything that can be done about that? |
bors
commented
May 1, 2021
bors
commented
May 1, 2021
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
eddyb
commented
May 3, 2021
Oh sheesh, I completely missed that, sorry. Maybe nominate for discussion? I don't have a strong opinion, I just didn't see it. |
Store all HIR owners in the same container This replaces the previous storage in a BTreeMap for each of Item/ImplItem/TraitItem/ForeignItem. This should allow for a more compact storage. Based on rust-lang#83114
Store all HIR owners in the same container This replaces the previous storage in a BTreeMap for each of Item/ImplItem/TraitItem/ForeignItem. This should allow for a more compact storage. Based on rust-lang/rust#83114
Split out of #82681.
The parent of a HIR node and its content are currently bundled together, but are rarely used together.
This PR separates both information in two distinct queries for HIR owners.
This reduces incremental invalidation for HIR items that appear within a function body when this body (and the local ids) changes.