parent_module_from_def_id does not need to be a query.

[cjgillot]

r? @ghost

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 826c1061c22583f2ea2a7b3d34a506a5c48b784e with merge da06d7bcbe8e7f803ce8751c76a7489cd07dfdab...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: da06d7bcbe8e7f803ce8751c76a7489cd07dfdab (da06d7bcbe8e7f803ce8751c76a7489cd07dfdab)

[compiler-errors]

i know this is a draft, but r=me if perf comes back well

edit: huh, actually maybe need to look at the rustdoc failure first?

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (da06d7bcbe8e7f803ce8751c76a7489cd07dfdab): 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)	57.9%	[0.2%, 194.0%]	6
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.3%	[0.3%, 0.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-2.1%, -1.1%]	18
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.1%	[-1.5%, -0.7%]	13
All ❌✅ (primary)	13.4%	[-2.1%, 194.0%]	24

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)	4.3%	[1.0%, 7.3%]	5
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.5%	[2.0%, 5.7%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-5.6%	[-6.8%, -4.3%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.5%	[-6.8%, 7.3%]	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)	54.1%	[3.0%, 170.0%]	6
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	54.1%	[3.0%, 170.0%]	6

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 648.817s -> 648.57s (-0.04%)

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 7a51b30 with merge c8f39db6e8dd706493e01bda31c9590175dd50ca...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: c8f39db6e8dd706493e01bda31c9590175dd50ca (c8f39db6e8dd706493e01bda31c9590175dd50ca)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (c8f39db6e8dd706493e01bda31c9590175dd50ca): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no 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.

@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
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-2.0%, -1.1%]	17
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.1%	[-1.4%, -0.2%]	12
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-2.0%, -1.1%]	17

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)	3.7%	[3.7%, 3.7%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.6%	[-6.4%, -0.5%]	4
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.8%	[-3.7%, -2.1%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-3.6%	[-6.4%, -0.5%]	4

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.5%	[-2.5%, -2.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.5%	[-2.5%, -2.5%]	1

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 649.941s -> 650.088s (0.02%)

[cjgillot]

r? @compiler-errors

The first commit was buggy, parent_module_from_def_id(id) would return id, which made rustdoc misbehave.
This version corrects the bug, and accurately returns the closest strict parent which is a module.

[compiler-errors]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 7a51b30 has been approved by compiler-errors

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 7a51b30 with merge 5973bfb...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: compiler-errors
Pushing 5973bfb to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (5973bfb): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -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)	0.3%	[0.2%, 0.4%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-2.0%, -1.1%]	17
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.2%	[-1.5%, -0.3%]	11
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.2%	[-2.0%, 0.4%]	19

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)	4.1%	[2.6%, 4.9%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-4.5%	[-6.1%, -3.4%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-4.5%	[-6.1%, -3.4%]	3

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.9%	[-2.9%, -2.9%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.9%	[-2.9%, -2.9%]	1

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 650.515s -> 651.426s (0.14%)