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

partially revertish lazily "compute" anon const default substs #92805

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 16, 2022

Conversation

BoxyUwU
Copy link
Member

@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU commented Jan 12, 2022

reverts #87280 except for some of the changes around ty::Unevaluated having a visitor and a generic for promoted
why revert: #92805 (comment)

r? @lcnr

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

Some changes occured to the CTFE / Miri engine

cc @rust-lang/miri

Some changes occured to rustc_codegen_cranelift

cc @bjorn3

Some changes occured to the CTFE / Miri engine

cc @rust-lang/miri

Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy.

cc @rust-lang/clippy

@rustbot rustbot added T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jan 12, 2022
@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jan 12, 2022
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU added the A-const-generics Area: const generics (parameters and arguments) label Jan 12, 2022
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Jan 12, 2022

Why is this getting reverted?

@BoxyUwU
Copy link
Member Author

BoxyUwU commented Jan 12, 2022

I knew I forgot something when making this PR.... will add a description explaining the "why" 😅

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Jan 12, 2022

I think we want visit_unevaluated_const to stick around idk how useful that is by itself 🤔 the part which I want to remove again is the TypeFlags change as that one caused some bugs in the past (#90266 and #90375) and is generally just quite confusing.

I never got to filtering the generic params (which is also more difficult than originally assumed) and we will probably implement a different solution for the "unused substs" problem in the future, so keeping these changes doesn't seem too practical for feature(generic_const_exprs).

And finally, we don't need any substs filtering for #![feature(min_generic_const_expr)] which is what i want to focus on first

@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Jan 12, 2022

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 12, 2022

📌 Commit e24b05e122b134496aa76e6b2333b1cbb5b618af has been approved by oli-obk

@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 Jan 12, 2022
@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Jan 12, 2022

@bors rollup=never

this is perf sensitive

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Jan 12, 2022

I would like to keep the Unevaluated split wrt promoteds and keep using visit_unevaluated_const.
That also means that we don't have to revert #88557 which is quite nice imo.

Should have been more clear when talking about #87280 and what i actually want to revert '^^

@bors r- for now

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jan 12, 2022
@RalfJung
Copy link
Member

Also some of these commit messages look like they should be fixed before merging.^^

@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU force-pushed the revert-lazy-anon-const-substs branch from 1facfa2 to 1312f61 Compare January 12, 2022 23:38
@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU changed the title revert lazily "compute" anon const default substs partially revertish lazily "compute" anon const default substs Jan 12, 2022
@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU force-pushed the revert-lazy-anon-const-substs branch from 1312f61 to 7e2cf3b Compare January 13, 2022 01:14
@@ -444,15 +443,13 @@ impl<'a, 'tcx> WfPredicates<'a, 'tcx> {
match constant.val {
ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated(uv) => {
assert!(uv.promoted.is_none());
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we can remove that assert

Copy link
Contributor

@lcnr lcnr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

r=me afterwards

thanks @BoxyUwU :3

compiler/rustc_typeck/src/check/check.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
compiler/rustc_typeck/src/check/check.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
compiler/rustc_typeck/src/check/check.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
compiler/rustc_typeck/src/check/check.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/clippy/clippy_lints/src/escape.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/clippy/clippy_lints/src/non_copy_const.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/clippy/clippy_utils/src/consts.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU force-pushed the revert-lazy-anon-const-substs branch from 9d2a60e to 6899064 Compare January 13, 2022 09:27
@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Jan 13, 2022

@bors r+ rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 13, 2022

📌 Commit 6899064be3ddaee785686a614179d9ccfd0d66a8 has been approved by lcnr

@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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jan 13, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 14, 2022

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #92883) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jan 14, 2022
@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU force-pushed the revert-lazy-anon-const-substs branch from 6899064 to 3f3a10f Compare January 15, 2022 01:20
@BoxyUwU
Copy link
Member Author

BoxyUwU commented Jan 15, 2022

@bors r=lcnr rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 15, 2022

📌 Commit 3f3a10f has been approved by lcnr

@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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jan 15, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 16, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 3f3a10f with merge 7be8693...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 16, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: lcnr
Pushing 7be8693 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jan 16, 2022
@bors bors merged commit 7be8693 into rust-lang:master Jan 16, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.60.0 milestone Jan 16, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (7be8693): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to moderate relevant mixed results 🤷 in compiler performance.

  • Moderate improvement in instruction counts (up to -1.4% on full builds of deeply-nested-async)
  • Small regression in instruction counts (up to 0.9% on incr-unchanged builds of clap-rs)

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Jan 16, 2022
@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Jan 17, 2022

seems to mostly mirror the perf results from #87280 https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=3b5df014390dcef66cc35f968fe51e9558e6ca13&end=22a1bd761de8b0ac85d9ecaae5f262d5798a4409

a bit surprised that the ctfe tests stayed about the same even though they regressed by about 4% in the original pr. it might make some sense to look a bit more into the impact of using `ty::Unevaluated' during type folding. Might get some more perf back in stress tests by adding some inlines there.

bors added a commit to rust-lang/rust-clippy that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2022
partially revertish `lazily "compute" anon const default substs`

reverts #87280 except for some of the changes around `ty::Unevaluated` having a visitor and a generic for promoted
why revert: <rust-lang/rust#92805 (comment)>

r? `@lcnr`
dario23 added a commit to dario23/rust-semverver that referenced this pull request May 4, 2022
dario23 added a commit to dario23/rust-semverver that referenced this pull request May 6, 2022
Needed to adjust stdout for trait_impls, due to new allocator generic
parameter for `Vec` and `Box`, decided it wasn't worth a separate
commit.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-const-generics Area: const generics (parameters and arguments) merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. 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. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants