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

canonicalizer: add lookup table #125495

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

@lcnr lcnr commented May 24, 2024

blocking this on being able to run perf, may be necessary for deeply nested types.

r? @compiler-errors

@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 May 24, 2024
@lcnr lcnr marked this pull request as ready for review May 24, 2024 20:24
@lcnr lcnr added the WG-trait-system-refactor The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver) label May 24, 2024
@compiler-errors compiler-errors 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-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels May 25, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 21, 2024

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #126650) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Aug 16, 2024

Some changes occurred in engine.rs, potentially modifying the public API of ObligationCtxt.

cc @lcnr, @compiler-errors

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor Author

lcnr commented Aug 16, 2024

@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 Aug 16, 2024
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Aug 16, 2024
… r=<try>

canonicalizer: add lookup table

blocking this on being able to run perf, may be necessary for deeply nested types.

r? `@compiler-errors`
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 16, 2024

⌛ Trying commit f572903 with merge e56bc53...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 16, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: e56bc53 (e56bc53ff6bf9a336645d2738392697459c461ac)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (e56bc53): 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)
23.2% [0.2%, 68.2%] 15
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.5% [0.4%, 0.6%] 7
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.8% [-4.4%, -0.2%] 9
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.3%, -0.2%] 5
All ❌✅ (primary) 13.4% [-4.4%, 68.2%] 24

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 11.2%)

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)
11.2% [1.6%, 13.9%] 7
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 11.2% [1.6%, 13.9%] 7

Cycles

Results (primary 20.1%)

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)
42.6% [5.0%, 59.5%] 7
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.5% [-3.1%, -2.0%] 7
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 20.1% [-3.1%, 59.5%] 14

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 751.027s -> 761.751s (1.43%)
Artifact size: 339.18 MiB -> 339.27 MiB (0.03%)

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Aug 16, 2024
@lcnr lcnr force-pushed the canonicalizer-bound-var-lookup branch from f572903 to 332098c Compare September 9, 2024 08:14
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 2, 2024

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #130821) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor Author

lcnr commented Oct 3, 2024

merged as part of #130821

@lcnr lcnr closed this Oct 3, 2024
@lcnr lcnr deleted the canonicalizer-bound-var-lookup branch October 3, 2024 08:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
perf-regression Performance regression. S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. WG-trait-system-refactor The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants