Encode info for Fn/AssocFn in a single place.

[cjgillot]

Split from #98867

[rustbot]

r? @estebank

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

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 0e5326bc02a6d8237dec6c8ff8f48b7b67d1ce96 with merge a25015e2c07b1a422deeccf8d1388bb3e1a6006f...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: a25015e2c07b1a422deeccf8d1388bb3e1a6006f (a25015e2c07b1a422deeccf8d1388bb3e1a6006f)

[compiler-errors]

This is much cleaner ❤️

r=me with clean perf

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (a25015e2c07b1a422deeccf8d1388bb3e1a6006f): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@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)	0.5%	[0.2%, 1.1%]	60
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.4%	[0.3%, 2.7%]	12
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.7%	[-0.8%, -0.6%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.5%	[0.2%, 1.1%]	60

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)	2.1%	[0.6%, 3.3%]	7
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.7%	[1.7%, 1.7%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-5.6%	[-5.9%, -5.3%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-5.2%	[-5.2%, -5.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-5.9%, 3.3%]	9

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)	2.4%	[2.2%, 2.7%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.4%	[2.2%, 2.7%]	4

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit c737af18dfc5482de74f2e00465c138d009e5dc4 with merge c5435a797d04abd6dc7100f90f50dc6b7441da5c...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: c5435a797d04abd6dc7100f90f50dc6b7441da5c (c5435a797d04abd6dc7100f90f50dc6b7441da5c)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (c5435a797d04abd6dc7100f90f50dc6b7441da5c): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@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)	0.4%	[0.2%, 0.8%]	38
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.9%	[0.3%, 1.6%]	12
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.2%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-0.6%, -0.3%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.3%	[-0.3%, 0.8%]	44

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)	0.6%	[0.5%, 0.6%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.6%	[1.6%, 1.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.3%	[-1.8%, -1.1%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.6%	[0.5%, 0.6%]	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)	1.4%	[0.9%, 1.8%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.4%	[0.9%, 1.8%]	2

[estebank]

r? @compiler-errors

[compiler-errors]

@rustbot author

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #107693) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[JohnCSimon]

@cjgillot Ping from triage: Can you post your status on this PR? This has sat idle for a few months.

[cjgillot]

I haven't finished investigating the perf regression. It is waiting on author.