Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
[experimental] Rvalue::InitBox prototype - #88700
Conversation
Amanieu
commented
Sep 6, 2021
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
rust-timer
commented
Sep 6, 2021
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
bors
commented
Sep 6, 2021
⌛ Trying commit 1dbf96965414a4778e996dc03952b9d0c318e884 with merge b375876e20ce4a2eff0f9588c09aa4e4114f696a... |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bors
commented
Sep 6, 2021
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
nbdd0121
commented
Sep 6, 2021
Do I actually need to fix all tools before a perf run could be done 🤔 |
Amanieu
commented
Sep 6, 2021
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
rust-timer
commented
Sep 6, 2021
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
bors
commented
Sep 6, 2021
⌛ Trying commit 50f13a3 with merge a7b586082fae51c336ba78f005a339965e537c85... |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bors
commented
Sep 6, 2021
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
rust-timer
commented
Sep 6, 2021
Queued a7b586082fae51c336ba78f005a339965e537c85 with parent 8ceea01, future comparison URL. |
rust-timer
commented
Sep 7, 2021
Finished benchmarking commit (a7b586082fae51c336ba78f005a339965e537c85): comparison url. Summary: This change led to large relevant mixed results 🤷 in compiler performance.
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. 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 led to changes in compiler perf. Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @bors rollup=never |
rust-log-analyzer
commented
Sep 7, 2021
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
oli-obk
commented
Sep 7, 2021
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
rust-timer
commented
Sep 7, 2021
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
bors
commented
Sep 7, 2021
⌛ Trying commit a9c6bfb with merge 29328d5b353b632549fa019564fbf8e9daf44703... |
bors
commented
Sep 7, 2021
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
rust-timer
commented
Sep 7, 2021
Queued 29328d5b353b632549fa019564fbf8e9daf44703 with parent 73641cd, future comparison URL. |
rust-timer
commented
Sep 7, 2021
Finished benchmarking commit (29328d5b353b632549fa019564fbf8e9daf44703): comparison url. Summary: This change led to large relevant mixed results 🤷 in compiler performance.
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. 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 led to changes in compiler perf. Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @bors rollup=never |
Introduce NullOp::AlignOf This PR introduces `Rvalue::NullaryOp(NullOp::AlignOf, ty)`, which will be lowered from `align_of`, similar to `size_of` lowering to `Rvalue::NullaryOp(NullOp::SizeOf, ty)`. The changes are originally part of rust-lang#88700 but since it's not dependent on other changes and could have performance impact on its own, it's separated into its own PR.
nbdd0121
commented
Sep 16, 2021
Closed this PR as it's an experiment; #89030 is the ready version for merge. |
Introduce NullOp::AlignOf This PR introduces `Rvalue::NullaryOp(NullOp::AlignOf, ty)`, which will be lowered from `align_of`, similar to `size_of` lowering to `Rvalue::NullaryOp(NullOp::SizeOf, ty)`. The changes are originally part of rust-lang#88700 but since it's not dependent on other changes and could have performance impact on its own, it's separated into its own PR.
Introduce `Rvalue::ShallowInitBox` Polished version of rust-lang#88700. Implements MCP rust-lang/compiler-team#460, and should allow rust-lang#43596 to go forward. In short, creating an empty box is split from a nullary-op `NullOp::Box` into two steps, first a call to `exchange_malloc`, then a `Rvalue::ShallowInitBox` which transmutes `*mut u8` to a shallow-initialized `Box<T>`. This allows the `exchange_malloc` call to unwind. Details can be found in the MCP. `NullOp::Box` is not yet removed, purely to make reverting easier in case anything goes wrong as the result of this PR. If revert is needed a reversion of "Use Rvalue::ShallowInitBox for box expression" commit followed by a test bless should be sufficient. Experiments in rust-lang#88700 showed a very slight compile-time perf regression due to (supposedly) slightly more time spent in LLVM. We could omit unwind edge generation (in non-`oom=panic` case) in box expression MIR construction to restore perf; but I don't think it's necessary since runtime perf isn't affected and perf difference is rather small.
Introduce NullOp::AlignOf This PR introduces `Rvalue::NullaryOp(NullOp::AlignOf, ty)`, which will be lowered from `align_of`, similar to `size_of` lowering to `Rvalue::NullaryOp(NullOp::SizeOf, ty)`. The changes are originally part of rust-lang#88700 but since it's not dependent on other changes and could have performance impact on its own, it's separated into its own PR.
Introduce `Rvalue::ShallowInitBox` Polished version of rust-lang#88700. Implements MCP rust-lang/compiler-team#460, and should allow rust-lang#43596 to go forward. In short, creating an empty box is split from a nullary-op `NullOp::Box` into two steps, first a call to `exchange_malloc`, then a `Rvalue::ShallowInitBox` which transmutes `*mut u8` to a shallow-initialized `Box<T>`. This allows the `exchange_malloc` call to unwind. Details can be found in the MCP. `NullOp::Box` is not yet removed, purely to make reverting easier in case anything goes wrong as the result of this PR. If revert is needed a reversion of "Use Rvalue::ShallowInitBox for box expression" commit followed by a test bless should be sufficient. Experiments in rust-lang#88700 showed a very slight compile-time perf regression due to (supposedly) slightly more time spent in LLVM. We could omit unwind edge generation (in non-`oom=panic` case) in box expression MIR construction to restore perf; but I don't think it's necessary since runtime perf isn't affected and perf difference is rather small.
r? @ghost