-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.2k
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
[DO NOT LAND] Regress the token-stream-stress
benchmark.
#67248
[DO NOT LAND] Regress the token-stream-stress
benchmark.
#67248
Conversation
I have a suspicion that there is a bug in rustc-perf or rust-timer causing the wrong revisions to be measured by CI. See rust-lang#66405 and rust-lang#67079 for more details. This commit deliberately causes a massive regression to the `token-stream-stress` benchmark. On my machine, the instruction count goes from 313M to 6084M, an 1843.4% regression. I want to see if a CI run replicates that.
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion |
[DO NOT LAND] Regress the `token-stream-stress` benchmark. I have a suspicion that there is a bug in rustc-perf or rust-timer causing the wrong revisions to be measured by CI. See #66405 and #67079 for more details. This commit deliberately causes a massive regression to the `token-stream-stress` benchmark. On my machine, the instruction count goes from 313M to 6084M, an 1843.4% regression. I want to see if a CI run replicates that. cc @Mark-Simulacrum r? @ghost
Here are the top 10
It shows a huge regression for |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-azure |
Queued 5e1e02e with parent de0abf7, future comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking try commit 5e1e02e, comparison URL. |
CI results match my local results. Top 10
A bit more variation among the barely-changing ones, but it disproves the theory that the wrong revisions are being tested. |
I have a suspicion that there is a bug in rustc-perf or rust-timer
causing the wrong revisions to be measured by CI. See #66405 and #67079
for more details.
This commit deliberately causes a massive regression to the
token-stream-stress
benchmark. On my machine, the instruction countgoes from 313M to 6084M, an 1843.4% regression. I want to see if a CI
run replicates that.
cc @Mark-Simulacrum
r? @ghost