[perf only] Test function specialization

[nikic]

r? @ghost

[nikic]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit b4eef9bb78ce1a5d5ff713eb931b5fc474ae9ddc with merge 42f15a888b84383660493ba571b9d8262d73681a...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[nikic]

LLD build still fails -- it looks like the llvm-driver-template.cpp.in export doesn't work for some reason.

[nikic]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 2c81171 with merge 70212127e0974013f7e031861d421356e85b0e27...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 70212127e0974013f7e031861d421356e85b0e27 (70212127e0974013f7e031861d421356e85b0e27)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (70212127e0974013f7e031861d421356e85b0e27): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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-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)	0.9%	[0.2%, 2.8%]	67
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.9%	[0.2%, 2.7%]	27
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.8%	[-4.9%, -0.2%]	61
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.0%	[-5.6%, -0.3%]	78
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-4.9%, 2.8%]	128

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)	2.3%	[0.8%, 3.6%]	10
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-3.9%, -0.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.6%	[-3.9%, 3.6%]	12

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)	2.0%	[1.1%, 2.7%]	11
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.2%	[2.1%, 2.4%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-4.0%, -1.2%]	98
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.9%	[-6.9%, -0.8%]	51
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.6%	[-4.0%, 2.7%]	109

[nikic]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 228430a with merge 413335368bf860e701f6365b0f2f0fa4d7f85b9a...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 413335368bf860e701f6365b0f2f0fa4d7f85b9a (413335368bf860e701f6365b0f2f0fa4d7f85b9a)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (413335368bf860e701f6365b0f2f0fa4d7f85b9a): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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-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)	0.9%	[0.2%, 2.6%]	71
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.9%	[0.2%, 2.8%]	27
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-5.2%, -0.2%]	64
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.0%	[-5.6%, -0.2%]	82
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.0%	[-5.2%, 2.6%]	135

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)	1.8%	[1.4%, 2.1%]	5
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.5%	[1.5%, 1.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.8%	[-3.5%, -0.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.6%	[-1.6%, -1.6%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.7%	[-3.5%, 2.1%]	7

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)	1.8%	[1.2%, 2.5%]	14
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.3%	[2.2%, 2.4%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-4.1%, -1.2%]	91
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.1%	[-7.7%, -1.0%]	54
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.5%	[-4.1%, 2.5%]	105

[nikic]

Diff func spec against LLVM 16 baseline: https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=413335368bf860e701f6365b0f2f0fa4d7f85b9a&end=70212127e0974013f7e031861d421356e85b0e27&stat=instructions%3Au