-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.9k
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
Fix perf regression caused by #79284 #79680
Conversation
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion |
⌛ Trying commit 135550c934ca2d12b1590572ae7aaff8c8b69bdc with merge 26b0c16b67088a9dffa5b4fc0770ad8c8f51540c... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Queued 26b0c16b67088a9dffa5b4fc0770ad8c8f51540c with parent 5be3f9f, future comparison URL. |
135550c
to
793c40e
Compare
Finished benchmarking try commit (26b0c16b67088a9dffa5b4fc0770ad8c8f51540c): comparison url. Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up. @bors rollup=never |
To compare with the regression. This more than fixes the regression on |
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit 793c40e has been approved by |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
#79284 only moved code around but this changed inlining and caused a large perf regression. This fixes it for me, though I'm less confident than usual because the regression was not observable with my usual (i.e. incremental) compilation settings.
r? @Mark-Simulacrum