-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.4k
[DO NOT MERGE] Perf run for zoxc's rustc-hash #96893
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
Conversation
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
⌛ Trying commit ea59ed2 with merge 71812917089730aa5abc2f6c5978c6718c9b0f5f... |
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Queued 71812917089730aa5abc2f6c5978c6718c9b0f5f with parent d53f1e8, future comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking commit (71812917089730aa5abc2f6c5978c6718c9b0f5f): comparison url. Summary:
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. 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 @bors rollup=never Footnotes |
As before: instruction counts are barely changed, but cycles and wall times look like a clear improvement. |
I did a local run on my Intel Linux box and results were underwhelming. Instruction counts barely changed. Cycles for primary benchmarks,
and secondary (many of these are non-rustc-perf benchmarks that I have downloaded):
Walltimes are generally too noisy on local runs to say much. |
As discussed, this looked like a clearer win on AMD. It's unclear on Intel, so it may not be worth it to bother anymore with this PR exactly as-is. It was on our performance roadmap, we tried it, and it's not a definite win. Closing the PR. |
This is another perf run to try and see the results of zoxc's version of the 64b fxhash, from their rustc-hash PR.
This was previously tried in #93651 on the older benchmarks, and we now want to see the results on the recently updated
rustc-perf
benchmarks.r? @ghost