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

Load include_bytes! directly into an Lrc #115296

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Aug 28, 2023

Conversation

saethlin
Copy link
Member

@saethlin saethlin commented Aug 27, 2023

This PR deletes an innocent-looking .into() that was converting from a Vec<u8> to Lrc<[u8]>. This has significant runtime and memory overhead when using include_bytes! to pull in a large binary file.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Aug 27, 2023

r? @jackh726

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

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Aug 27, 2023
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@saethlin saethlin changed the title Load include_bytes! directly into an Rc Load include_bytes! directly into an Lrc Aug 27, 2023
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@jackh726
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 28, 2023

📌 Commit f26293d has been approved by jackh726

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@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 Aug 28, 2023
@saethlin
Copy link
Member Author

Based on searching the benchmark suite I suspect this won't have any observable perf impact, but the point is to make things faster...

@bors rollup=iffy

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 28, 2023

⌛ Testing commit f26293d with merge 41cb42a...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 28, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jackh726
Pushing 41cb42a to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Aug 28, 2023
@bors bors merged commit 41cb42a into rust-lang:master Aug 28, 2023
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.74.0 milestone Aug 28, 2023
@saethlin saethlin deleted the dont-duplicate-allocs branch August 28, 2023 09:25
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (41cb42a): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

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

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)
3.6% [3.6%, 3.6%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.1% [-2.3%, -2.0%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) 3.6% [3.6%, 3.6%] 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)
2.6% [2.6%, 2.6%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 632.239s -> 631.418s (-0.13%)
Artifact size: 316.22 MiB -> 316.30 MiB (0.03%)

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. 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.

None yet

6 participants