Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Inline functions called from add_coverage #115058

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 30, 2023

Conversation

Swatinem
Copy link
Contributor

This removes quite a bit of indirection and duplicated code related to getting the FunctionCoverage.

CC @Zalathar

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Aug 21, 2023

r? @fee1-dead

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Aug 21, 2023
@Zalathar
Copy link
Contributor

@rustbot label +A-code-coverage

@rustbot rustbot added the A-code-coverage Area: Source-based code coverage (-Cinstrument-coverage) label Aug 22, 2023
@Zalathar
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, these methods were left over from the SSA/LLVM split that was removed in #113355, so getting rid of them makes sense.

@fee1-dead
Copy link
Member

I'm not familiar with codegen code.

r? compiler

@rustbot rustbot assigned compiler-errors and unassigned fee1-dead Aug 22, 2023
This removes quite a bit of indirection and duplicated code related to getting the `FunctionCoverage`.
Copy link
Contributor

@Zalathar Zalathar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me. 👍

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 30, 2023

📌 Commit 2ceea9a has been approved by compiler-errors

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors 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-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 30, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 30, 2023

⌛ Testing commit 2ceea9a with merge 8c79e8d...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 30, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: compiler-errors
Pushing 8c79e8d to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Aug 30, 2023
@bors bors merged commit 8c79e8d into rust-lang:master Aug 30, 2023
11 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.74.0 milestone Aug 30, 2023
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (8c79e8d): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.4% [0.4%, 0.4%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

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)
0.9% [0.6%, 1.3%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.2% [-1.3%, -1.1%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.2% [-3.1%, -1.4%] 3
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.1% [-1.3%, 1.3%] 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)
-0.6% [-0.7%, -0.4%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.6% [-0.7%, -0.4%] 2

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 632.335s -> 630.996s (-0.21%)
Artifact size: 316.60 MiB -> 316.52 MiB (-0.03%)

@Swatinem Swatinem deleted the inline-add-coverage branch January 6, 2024 07:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-code-coverage Area: Source-based code coverage (-Cinstrument-coverage) merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants