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

Clear inner_attr_ranges regularly. #127477

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 14, 2024

Conversation

nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor

@nnethercote nnethercote commented Jul 8, 2024

There's a comment saying we don't do it for performance reasons, but it doesn't actually affect performance.

The commit also tweaks the control flow, to make clearer that two code paths are mutually exclusive.

r? @petrochenkov

There's a comment saying we don't do it for performance reasons, but it
doesn't actually affect performance.

The commit also tweaks the control flow, to make clearer that two code
paths are mutually exclusive.
@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 Jul 8, 2024
@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jul 8, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 8, 2024

⌛ Trying commit 99721c8 with merge a399dda...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2024
… r=<try>

Clear `inner_attr_ranges` regularly.

There's a comment saying we don't do it for performance reasons, but it doesn't actually affect performance.

The commit also tweaks the control flow, to make clearer that two code paths are mutually exclusive.

r? `@ghost`
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 8, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: a399dda (a399ddac2a96b84bd7f8d4fd5e2fdcff8d230479)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (a399dda): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and 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)
0.2% [0.2%, 0.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.2%, -0.2%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results (primary -2.4%, secondary -9.3%)

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)
-2.4% [-3.7%, -1.6%] 6
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-9.3% [-13.4%, -5.3%] 10
All ❌✅ (primary) -2.4% [-3.7%, -1.6%] 6

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 699.651s -> 700.319s (0.10%)
Artifact size: 328.40 MiB -> 328.39 MiB (-0.00%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jul 8, 2024
@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor

tgross35 commented Jul 8, 2024

Note was added at #82608, for reference

@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note was added at #82608, for reference

Yes. But that was a large PR, and I can believe not every aspect of its performance effects were fully understood. Or something else has changed in the meantime. Because the perf run shows it has no effect. (The cycle/walltime improvements appear to be bogus, just a reversion to the mean.)

@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor Author

r? @petrochenkov

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jul 8, 2024

Could not assign reviewer from: petrochenkov.
User(s) petrochenkov are either the PR author, already assigned, or on vacation, and there are no other candidates.
Use r? to specify someone else to assign.

@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor

tgross35 commented Jul 8, 2024

Note was added at #82608, for reference

Yes. But that was a large PR, and I can believe not every aspect of its performance effects were fully understood. Or something else has changed in the meantime. Because the perf run shows it has no effect. (The cycle/walltime improvements appear to be bogus, just a reversion to the mean.)

Oh yeah I believe you of course, I was just curious where the comment came from and figured I can't be the only one :)

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 13, 2024

📌 Commit 99721c8 has been approved by petrochenkov

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 Jul 13, 2024
workingjubilee added a commit to workingjubilee/rustc that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2024
…s, r=petrochenkov

Clear `inner_attr_ranges` regularly.

There's a comment saying we don't do it for performance reasons, but it doesn't actually affect performance.

The commit also tweaks the control flow, to make clearer that two code paths are mutually exclusive.

r? `@petrochenkov`
workingjubilee added a commit to workingjubilee/rustc that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2024
…s, r=petrochenkov

Clear `inner_attr_ranges` regularly.

There's a comment saying we don't do it for performance reasons, but it doesn't actually affect performance.

The commit also tweaks the control flow, to make clearer that two code paths are mutually exclusive.

r? ``@petrochenkov``
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2024
…kingjubilee

Rollup of 8 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#122300 (Add FileCheck annotations to mir-opt/dest-prop tests)
 - rust-lang#126967 (Promote the `wasm32-wasip2` target to Tier 2)
 - rust-lang#127370 (Windows: Add experimental support for linking std-required system DLLs using raw-dylib)
 - rust-lang#127434 (use "bootstrap" instead of "rustbuild" in comments and docs)
 - rust-lang#127477 (Clear `inner_attr_ranges` regularly.)
 - rust-lang#127558 (More attribute cleanups)
 - rust-lang#127659 (Use ManuallyDrop in BufWriter::into_parts)
 - rust-lang#127677 (using correct tool mode for `run-make-support` crate)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
jhpratt added a commit to jhpratt/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2024
…s, r=petrochenkov

Clear `inner_attr_ranges` regularly.

There's a comment saying we don't do it for performance reasons, but it doesn't actually affect performance.

The commit also tweaks the control flow, to make clearer that two code paths are mutually exclusive.

r? ```@petrochenkov```
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2024
Rollup of 7 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#122300 (Add FileCheck annotations to mir-opt/dest-prop tests)
 - rust-lang#127153 (Initial implementation of anonymous_pipe API)
 - rust-lang#127434 (use "bootstrap" instead of "rustbuild" in comments and docs)
 - rust-lang#127477 (Clear `inner_attr_ranges` regularly.)
 - rust-lang#127659 (Use ManuallyDrop in BufWriter::into_parts)
 - rust-lang#127671 (rustdoc: rename `issue-\d+.rs` tests to have meaningful names (part 8))
 - rust-lang#127677 (using correct tool mode for `run-make-support` crate)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2024
…kingjubilee

Rollup of 6 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#122300 (Add FileCheck annotations to mir-opt/dest-prop tests)
 - rust-lang#127434 (use "bootstrap" instead of "rustbuild" in comments and docs)
 - rust-lang#127477 (Clear `inner_attr_ranges` regularly.)
 - rust-lang#127558 (More attribute cleanups)
 - rust-lang#127659 (Use ManuallyDrop in BufWriter::into_parts)
 - rust-lang#127671 (rustdoc: rename `issue-\d+.rs` tests to have meaningful names (part 8))

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 1c8ea14 into rust-lang:master Jul 14, 2024
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.81.0 milestone Jul 14, 2024
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#127477 - nnethercote:tweak-inner_attr_ranges, r=petrochenkov

Clear `inner_attr_ranges` regularly.

There's a comment saying we don't do it for performance reasons, but it doesn't actually affect performance.

The commit also tweaks the control flow, to make clearer that two code paths are mutually exclusive.

r? ````@petrochenkov````
@nnethercote nnethercote deleted the tweak-inner_attr_ranges branch July 14, 2024 20:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
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.

6 participants