FIXME(-Znext-solver) triage

[lcnr]

r? @BoxyUwU

[rustbot]

HIR ty lowering was modified

cc @fmease

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

[compiler-errors]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 42adee0 with merge 19b8438...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 19b8438 (19b8438bbbb735b85f6640375c38a81c802f53cf)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (19b8438): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no 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.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.1%	[-1.5%, -0.8%]	9
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -3.4%, secondary -0.7%)

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
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.3%	[0.4%, 4.6%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.4%	[-3.4%, -3.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.5%	[-3.6%, -0.4%]	15
All ❌✅ (primary)	-3.4%	[-3.4%, -3.4%]	1

Cycles

Results (secondary 0.4%)

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
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.8%	[0.4%, 2.2%]	11
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.9%	[-1.2%, -0.5%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: missing data
Artifact size: 370.26 MiB -> 370.27 MiB (0.00%)

[lcnr]

This MIRI failure looks spurious, first time i've seen it so let's ignore it for now

[BoxyUwU]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 7dac755 has been approved by BoxyUwU

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 7dac755 with merge bdb04d6...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: BoxyUwU
Pushing bdb04d6 to master...

[github-actions]

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 0a39445 (parent) -> bdb04d6 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 14 test diffs

14 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard bdb04d6c4fff0970bc2f1fad775bec807d9470ee --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

1. dist-x86_64-apple: 13442.3s -> 7841.6s (-41.7%)
2. test-various: 4332.8s -> 5025.7s (16.0%)
3. i686-gnu-1: 7210.6s -> 8294.9s (15.0%)
4. aarch64-apple: 4688.6s -> 4001.0s (-14.7%)
5. mingw-check-1: 1611.3s -> 1834.2s (13.8%)
6. dist-apple-various: 7178.1s -> 6205.4s (-13.6%)
7. i686-gnu-2: 5378.4s -> 6065.1s (12.8%)
8. x86_64-gnu: 6726.6s -> 7558.2s (12.4%)
9. x86_64-apple-1: 7354.5s -> 8258.0s (12.3%)
10. dist-sparcv9-solaris: 5263.7s -> 5811.4s (10.4%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (bdb04d6): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.4%	[-0.6%, -0.3%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.3%, secondary 2.7%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.3%	[1.0%, 5.5%]	24
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.7%	[0.7%, 9.9%]	84
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.3%	[1.0%, 5.5%]	24

Cycles

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 754.356s -> 755.487s (0.15%)
Artifact size: 372.07 MiB -> 372.14 MiB (0.02%)