-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.1k
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
anonymize all bound vars, not just regions #99730
Conversation
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
⌛ Trying commit 8f7f5b8a38a1cb52504142937e0cd6834e5d29cc with merge 56beffeda7c3ae12b116d2fdb10c6e2ac0431631... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Queued 56beffeda7c3ae12b116d2fdb10c6e2ac0431631 with parent dc2d232, future comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking commit (56beffeda7c3ae12b116d2fdb10c6e2ac0431631): comparison url. Instruction count
Max RSS (memory usage)This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. CyclesResults
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 |
Want to read through this again, but overall LGTM I think |
Lgtm, too r? @jackh726 |
ca1f10f
to
8dffa1f
Compare
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
⌛ Trying commit 8dffa1f672c66961ece63f1a8a8659a2675cfdaa with merge f6c9701f48e24692d3403ab5d31d9ec8838a5c18... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Queued f6c9701f48e24692d3403ab5d31d9ec8838a5c18 with parent 05e678c, future comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking commit (f6c9701f48e24692d3403ab5d31d9ec8838a5c18): comparison url. Instruction count
Max RSS (memory usage)Results
CyclesResults
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. @bors rollup=never Footnotes |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
one thought, otherwise r=me
compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/fold.rs
Outdated
if debruijn == ty::INNERMOST { | ||
region | ||
} else { | ||
self.tcx.mk_region(ty::ReLateBound(debruijn, br)) | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Isn't there a mk_or_reuse_region`?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
not that i know of, we previously used mk_or_reuse_ty
during type folding but afaict that has been removed in favor of a manual check as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it's called reuse_or_mk_region
instead 😁
@bors r=jackh726 rollup=never |
📌 Commit 8dffa1f672c66961ece63f1a8a8659a2675cfdaa has been approved by It is now in the queue for this repository. |
@bors r- |
want to try only reusing regions without the change from |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Finished benchmarking commit (211637d): comparison url. Instruction count
Max RSS (memory usage)Results
CyclesResults
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. @rustbot label: -perf-regression Footnotes |
This PR was a pretty large regression in bootstrap compile times (bottom of https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=3924dac7bb29bc8eb348059c901e8f912399c857&end=211637d0802a1c17d41b414e091e9a8691b26068&stat=instructions:u), 2% overall and 5+% across a number of rustc_ crates. Might be worth looking at the diff here to see if we can reduce some extra monomorphization that was presumably introduced. |
A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain) Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
fixes #98702
r? types