Print omitted frames count for short backtrace mode

[chenyukang]

Fixes #111730

[rustbot]

r? @m-ou-se

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[rustbot]

⚠️ Warning ⚠️

• These commits modify submodules.

[rustbot]

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

[m-ou-se]

This looks okay to me. Just two suggestions:

[chenyukang]

@rustbot ready

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #113046) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[chenyukang]

@rustbot ready

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #113176) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[chenyukang]

@rustbot ready

[workingjubilee]

Seems m-ou-se's comments were addressed!
@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 809ef24 has been approved by workingjubilee

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[chenyukang]

@bors r=@workingjubilee

[bors]

📌 Commit 2eb2f17db146e2cbd94685c9f604b004da10a75a has been approved by workingjubilee

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 2eb2f17db146e2cbd94685c9f604b004da10a75a with merge 5f486f777c84833a52a30754663621505541185f...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[workingjubilee]

Hmm, one more go. If this still doesn't pass then I think we should reassess this and approach it more systematically.

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 7b3d1b7 has been approved by workingjubilee

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 7b3d1b7 with merge d4145ee...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: workingjubilee
Pushing d4145ee to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (d4145ee): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

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
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	6.1%	[6.1%, 6.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Cycles

Results

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)	3.4%	[3.0%, 4.1%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

Results

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)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Bootstrap: 653.169s -> 653.113s (-0.01%)

[workingjubilee]

That's a really wild shift...

[chenyukang]

Hmm, one more go. If this still doesn't pass then I think we should reassess this and approach it more systematically.

@bors r+

Yep, the hard thing for strip backtrace message is different arch may have trivial difference, and I don't have a x64_linux in my local env :(

[chenyukang]

That's a really wild shift...

Interesting...
But my code changes is only related error handling, it should not be on the hot path.
we also have benchmark testing on errors?

[rylev]

Seems like the start of noise:

@rustbot label: perf-regression-triaged