Rollup of 8 pull requests

[Dylan-DPC]

Successful merges:

• Improve generating Custom entry function #104001 (Improve generating Custom entry function)
• nll: correctly deal with bivariance #104411 (nll: correctly deal with bivariance)
• Properly link {Once,Lazy}{Cell,Lock} in docs #104528 (Properly link {Once,Lazy}{Cell,Lock} in docs)
• Improve accuracy of asinh and acosh #104553 (Improve accuracy of asinh and acosh)
• Use ErrorGuaranteed::unchecked_claim_error_was_emitted less #104554 (Use ErrorGuaranteed::unchecked_claim_error_was_emitted less)
• couple of clippy::perf fixes #104566 (couple of clippy::perf fixes)
• deduplicate tests #104575 (deduplicate tests)
• diagnostics: only show one suggestion for method -> assoc fn #104580 (diagnostics: only show one suggestion for method -> assoc fn)

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

[Dylan-DPC]

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

[bors]

📌 Commit 3cf3a65 has been approved by Dylan-DPC

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 3cf3a65 with merge 2f8d804...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Dylan-DPC
Pushing 2f8d804 to master...

[rust-timer]

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR#	Perf Build Sha
#104580	92ee68a0f9597d8f5d1ddb7b7ac0a6d1fc66a546
#104575	411fba3e8f8fdf94a19a9b912920514c925a6149
#104566	d5eccfa07c1de36cf7c2962cad71793f52c0332a
#104554	ed2952a5aa28c545cfaa811d0e65f39b090d0877
#104553	ad56bae25e34ad3bb4a308a396df22c9fa0471d2
#104528	66e9b5f83ea6d009b5ca8d0710eb204c4fd69056
#104411	e243339f19ed4d6675ac5ee1f15043a903b2e81d
#104001	54e530efcf1fe0b71752ffbf11cb26e0d3a6d99a

previous master: becc24a23a

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (2f8d804): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - ACTION NEEDED

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
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.4%	[0.2%, 0.7%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	6.1%	[1.3%, 8.8%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[0.2%, 0.7%]	3

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.9%	[3.7%, 6.6%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results

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.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.2%	[0.5%, 2.1%]	29
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.2%	[1.2%, 9.2%]	27
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[0.5%, 2.1%]	29

[lqd]

@rust-timer build e243339f19ed4d6675ac5ee1f15043a903b2e81d

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (e243339f19ed4d6675ac5ee1f15043a903b2e81d): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - ACTION NEEDED

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

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.7%	[0.7%, 0.7%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	6.1%	[1.4%, 8.7%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.7%	[0.7%, 0.7%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.1%	[1.1%, 1.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results

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.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	6.1%	[2.3%, 8.2%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

[lqd]

At least #104411 is involved, for 2 of the 3 regressions.

[rylev]

cc @lcnr who authored #104411. The regressions are few enough in number that I don't think this is necessarily worth looking into.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged