Implement normalize_erasing_regions queries in terms of 'try' version by b-naber · Pull Request #91672 · rust-lang/rust

b-naber · 2021-12-08T20:53:36Z

Attempt to lessen performance regression caused by #91255

b-naber · 2021-12-08T20:54:48Z

What can we do about this duplication? We can't just remove the query description of normalize_erasing... queries.

b-naber · 2021-12-08T20:58:00Z

Wasn't sure whether it's better to use try_normalize_generic_arg_after_erasing_regions here directly or implement this as here (and go through the visitor). The latter would lead to more caching, which might be beneficial when calling normalize_erasing_regions in later stages of compilation, or we might just cache stuff we don't need and also have the cost of traversing the visitor on each call, not sure.

bors · 2021-12-08T22:32:43Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #91665) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

the8472 · 2021-12-09T10:17:01Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

rust-timer · 2021-12-09T10:17:02Z

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

bors · 2021-12-09T10:17:09Z

⌛ Trying commit 59a33c262b0ff37963f1f55b2008f3f4c716c601 with merge a16ff5c167cd59dbef8e0d6e84cf32aeb4a97a51...

bors · 2021-12-09T12:40:11Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: a16ff5c167cd59dbef8e0d6e84cf32aeb4a97a51 (a16ff5c167cd59dbef8e0d6e84cf32aeb4a97a51)

rust-timer · 2021-12-09T12:40:12Z

Queued a16ff5c167cd59dbef8e0d6e84cf32aeb4a97a51 with parent 600820d, future comparison URL.

rust-timer · 2021-12-09T14:10:48Z

Finished benchmarking commit (a16ff5c167cd59dbef8e0d6e84cf32aeb4a97a51): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to small relevant mixed results 🤷 in compiler performance.

Small improvement in instruction counts (up to -0.7% on full builds of deeply-nested-closures)
Small regression in instruction counts (up to 0.7% on incr-unchanged builds of keccak)

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 @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-review -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

jackh726

Thought: Do we even need the normalize_generic_arg_after_erasing_regions and normalize_mir_const_after_erasing_regions queries? Seems like we can just make them either inherent methods on TyCtxt<'tcx> or, better, just call try_* with a bug!() in the one they're called each...

b-naber · 2021-12-10T16:34:47Z

@jackh726 Can you request another perf-run, please?

jackh726 · 2021-12-10T17:18:54Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

rust-timer · 2021-12-10T17:18:56Z

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

bors · 2021-12-10T17:19:03Z

⌛ Trying commit 009e83488716f90c1ec7d9d8a635d2e6bc2e94c9 with merge 763e1db0840ce350629924afc881ea361b2192a2...

bors · 2021-12-10T18:57:26Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 763e1db0840ce350629924afc881ea361b2192a2 (763e1db0840ce350629924afc881ea361b2192a2)

rust-timer · 2021-12-10T18:57:27Z

Queued 763e1db0840ce350629924afc881ea361b2192a2 with parent 0b42dea, future comparison URL.

rust-timer · 2021-12-10T20:27:37Z

Finished benchmarking commit (763e1db0840ce350629924afc881ea361b2192a2): comparison url.

Summary: This benchmark run did not return any relevant changes.

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.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

jackh726 · 2021-12-10T21:16:47Z

Mild perf win but simpler API regardless.

@bors r+

b-naber · 2021-12-13T21:37:11Z

@jackh726 Small problem here, I deleted the branch on my machine once it was r+'ed. I'm unable to recover the branch from my fork on github. Are there other options besides opening a new PR?

b-naber · 2021-12-13T21:47:10Z

nvm, fortunately you can also resolve conflicts directly in github.

the8472 · 2021-12-13T21:48:46Z

Github says the branch still exists on your remote. You should be able to fetch it it and then create a branch from the remote ref.

b-naber · 2021-12-13T21:50:12Z

@the8472 I cloned the remote repo, but it only had a single master branch for some reason. What do you mean by fetching the remote branch?

b-naber · 2021-12-13T21:51:18Z

Ok nvm, thats a git command I didnt know about.

the8472 · 2021-12-13T22:00:42Z

Merge branch 'master' into merge-normalize-erasing-regions-queries

That breaks the no-merge policy, you have to rebase onto current master instead.

b-naber · 2021-12-13T22:09:31Z

Merge branch 'master' into merge-normalize-erasing-regions-queries
That breaks the no-merge policy, you have to rebase onto current master instead.

Thanks.

b-naber · 2021-12-16T21:58:53Z

@jackh726 Can you r+ this again, please?

jackh726 · 2021-12-16T22:04:51Z

@bors r+

bors · 2021-12-16T22:04:53Z

📌 Commit 399ab40 has been approved by jackh726

bors · 2021-12-17T02:03:16Z

⌛ Testing commit 399ab40 with merge 9b45f04...

bors · 2021-12-17T05:15:49Z

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jackh726
Pushing 9b45f04 to master...

rust-timer · 2021-12-17T08:36:01Z

Finished benchmarking commit (9b45f04): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to very large relevant mixed results 🤷 in compiler performance.

Very large improvement in instruction counts (up to -11.6% on incr-unchanged builds of tuple-stress)
Very large regression in instruction counts (up to 7.4% on incr-unchanged builds of ctfe-stress-4)

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

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

jackh726 · 2021-12-17T14:11:30Z

That's... weird

rylev · 2021-12-21T15:25:04Z

This seems likely to be noise as a result of the issue tracked in rust-lang/rustc-perf#1126 -- marking as triaged, not something we should address directly.

@rustbot label +perf-regression-triaged

rust-highfive assigned jackh726 Dec 8, 2021

rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Dec 8, 2021

b-naber commented Dec 8, 2021
View reviewed changes

b-naber force-pushed the merge-normalize-erasing-regions-queries branch from 28bb188 to 59a33c2Compare December 9, 2021 08:35

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Dec 9, 2021

apiraino added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Dec 9, 2021

rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Dec 9, 2021

jackh726 requested changes Dec 9, 2021
View reviewed changes

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Dec 10, 2021

rustbot removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. perf-regression Performance regression. labels Dec 10, 2021

bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Dec 13, 2021

rustbot added the T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Dec 13, 2021

This comment has been minimized.
Sign in to view

b-naber added 2 commits December 13, 2021 23:04

normalize_generic_arg_after in terms of try version
8250eef

get rid of normalize_generic_arg... queries
399ab40

b-naber force-pushed the merge-normalize-erasing-regions-queries branch from f84942c to 399ab40Compare December 13, 2021 22:09

bors 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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Dec 16, 2021

bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 17, 2021

bors merged commit 9b45f04 into rust-lang:masterDec 17, 2021

rustbot added this to the 1.59.0 milestone Dec 17, 2021

rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Dec 17, 2021

jackh726 mentioned this pull request Dec 17, 2021
Make DefIdrepr(C), optimize big-endian field order #92012
Merged

rustbot added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Dec 21, 2021

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

b-naber commented Dec 8, 2021

Uh oh!

b-naberDec 8, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

b-naberDec 8, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 8, 2021

Uh oh!

the8472 commented Dec 9, 2021

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Dec 9, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 9, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 9, 2021

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Dec 9, 2021

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Dec 9, 2021

Uh oh!

jackh726 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

b-naber commented Dec 10, 2021

Uh oh!

jackh726 commented Dec 10, 2021

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Dec 10, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 10, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 10, 2021

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Dec 10, 2021

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Dec 10, 2021

Uh oh!

jackh726 commented Dec 10, 2021

Uh oh!

b-naber commented Dec 13, 2021

Uh oh!

b-naber commented Dec 13, 2021

Uh oh!

the8472 commented Dec 13, 2021

Uh oh!

b-naber commented Dec 13, 2021

Uh oh!

b-naber commented Dec 13, 2021

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

the8472 commented Dec 13, 2021

Uh oh!

b-naber commented Dec 13, 2021

Uh oh!

b-naber commented Dec 16, 2021

Uh oh!

jackh726 commented Dec 16, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 16, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 17, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 17, 2021

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Dec 17, 2021

Uh oh!

jackh726 commented Dec 17, 2021• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rylev commented Dec 21, 2021

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

jackh726 commented Dec 17, 2021•
edited
Loading