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

Reopen 91719 #94570

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 4, 2022
Merged

Reopen 91719 #94570

merged 4 commits into from
Mar 4, 2022

Conversation

shampoofactory
Copy link
Contributor

@shampoofactory shampoofactory commented Mar 3, 2022

Reopened #91719, which was closed inadvertently due to technical difficulties.

@rustbot rustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Mar 3, 2022
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @matthewjasper (or someone else) soon.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Mar 3, 2022
Co-authored-by: Scott McMurray <scottmcm@users.noreply.github.com>
@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

r? @workingjubilee
Let's get the formalities out of the way as fast as possible.
@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

// CHECK-NEXT: ret i1 %[[EQ]]
x == [0; 8]
}

// CHECK-LABEL: @array_eq_zero_long([1234 x i16]*
#[no_mangle]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry, I forget this when I suggested the codegen test.

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

@bors try

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 3, 2022

⌛ Trying commit 0c13186 with merge 52b7c7ed6f087a5b756d1905d486240019ae4a29...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 3, 2022

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 52b7c7ed6f087a5b756d1905d486240019ae4a29 (52b7c7ed6f087a5b756d1905d486240019ae4a29)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued 52b7c7ed6f087a5b756d1905d486240019ae4a29 with parent 10913c0, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (52b7c7ed6f087a5b756d1905d486240019ae4a29): comparison url.

Summary: This benchmark run shows 111 relevant improvements 🎉 but 37 relevant regressions 😿 to instruction counts.

  • Arithmetic mean of relevant regressions: 0.5%
  • Arithmetic mean of relevant improvements: -1.5%
  • Arithmetic mean of all relevant changes: -1.0%
  • Largest improvement in instruction counts: -6.9% on full builds of deeply-nested-async check
  • Largest regression in instruction counts: 1.4% on incr-full builds of piston-image opt

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 led 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-review -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Mar 4, 2022
@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

Excellent!

To quote myself again:
"That's even nicer than the last run. The highs aren't actually that much higher, but the dips are shallower and it's on average much better. It might be within random variance, but I suspect this actually neatly explains why what was once an optimization is now a regression: the Rust ABI was diverted down a path that LLVM did not focus much on optimizing in the next 5 versions, so as LLVM 14 is somewhat better at this than LLVM 13, likely LLVM 13 was better than LLVM 12, etc., all the way back to LLVM 9, when it was actually a win to take the other path."

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged
@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 4, 2022

📌 Commit 0c13186 has been approved by workingjubilee

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Mar 4, 2022
@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Mar 4, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 4, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 0c13186 with merge b4bf56c...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 4, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: workingjubilee
Pushing b4bf56c to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Mar 4, 2022
@bors bors merged commit b4bf56c into rust-lang:master Mar 4, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.61.0 milestone Mar 4, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (b4bf56c): comparison url.

Summary: This benchmark run shows 131 relevant improvements 🎉 but 28 relevant regressions 😿 to instruction counts.

  • Arithmetic mean of relevant regressions: 0.5%
  • Arithmetic mean of relevant improvements: -1.4%
  • Arithmetic mean of all relevant changes: -1.0%
  • Largest improvement in instruction counts: -6.9% on full builds of deeply-nested-async check
  • Largest regression in instruction counts: 1.3% on incr-full builds of piston-image opt

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants