Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining #117192

saethlin · 2023-10-25T21:34:21Z

No description provided.

rustbot · 2023-10-25T21:34:25Z

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

saethlin · 2023-10-25T21:34:44Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-10-25T21:35:54Z

⌛ Trying commit 242d47d with merge 4729728...

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining r? `@ghost`

bors · 2023-10-25T22:57:01Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 4729728 (47297289968ed393160d52bfca90a8d1c2e4c3c3)

rust-timer · 2023-10-26T01:11:29Z

Finished benchmarking commit (4729728): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

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

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.6%]	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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.5%	[0.9%, 5.1%]	5
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.4%	[-5.0%, -1.2%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

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

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)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.2%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.2%]	4

Bootstrap: missing data
Artifact size: 304.44 MiB -> 304.44 MiB (-0.00%)

saethlin · 2023-10-26T01:14:28Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-10-26T01:15:37Z

⌛ Trying commit ffa51c9 with merge 4ddfadb...

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining r? `@ghost`

bors · 2023-10-26T02:38:35Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 4ddfadb (4ddfadb5b5c09d7ac95df6ae8f0b15f9afc69aef)

rust-timer · 2023-10-26T04:37:06Z

Finished benchmarking commit (4ddfadb): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

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 @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-perf +perf-regression

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)	1.9%	[1.1%, 4.0%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[1.0%, 1.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-1.0%, -0.8%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.9%	[-1.0%, 4.0%]	6

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)	2.6%	[1.4%, 5.1%]	5
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.5%	[1.2%, 5.0%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.2%	[-4.1%, -2.7%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.1%	[-4.5%, -0.8%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.5%	[-4.1%, 5.1%]	8

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)	1.9%	[0.8%, 4.3%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.3%	[1.3%, 1.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.8%	[-0.8%, -0.8%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.4%	[-0.8%, 4.3%]	5

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)	0.2%	[0.0%, 2.7%]	83
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.9%	[0.0%, 3.3%]	26
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.3%, -0.0%]	8
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.2%	[-0.3%, 2.7%]	91

Bootstrap: missing data
Artifact size: 304.48 MiB -> 304.49 MiB (0.00%)

saethlin · 2023-10-26T05:08:01Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-10-26T05:09:10Z

⌛ Trying commit dcde30d with merge c7f0427...

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining r? `@ghost`

bors · 2023-10-26T06:30:56Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: c7f0427 (c7f04272f0de8d2a5a62dce343201180175525d3)

saethlin · 2024-03-11T22:30:45Z

I may refine this idea later, but I'm not working on this PR anymore.

saethlin · 2025-11-09T21:45:49Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining

rust-bors · 2025-11-10T00:02:50Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: b21ece8 (b21ece8d51cef9e3fabc49fe39461709e723c9ef, parent: 86b95ebc24092acac75e205d95e84e6d4539601f)

rust-timer · 2025-11-10T01:53:55Z

Finished benchmarking commit (b21ece8): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.5%	[1.5%, 1.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-1.3%, -1.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-1.3%, -0.1%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-1.3%, 1.5%]	2

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.3%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-1.3%, -1.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-1.3%, -1.3%]	1

Cycles

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 476.643s -> 474.678s (-0.41%)
Artifact size: 391.27 MiB -> 391.27 MiB (0.00%)

saethlin · 2025-11-10T02:05:10Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining

rust-log-analyzer · 2025-11-10T02:42:56Z

The job x86_64-gnu-gcc failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/function-as-argument.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/generic-drop-glue.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/generic-functions.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/generic-impl.rs ... ok
FATAL: !(missing.is_empty() && unexpected.is_empty() && wrong_cgus.is_empty())
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/impl-in-non-instantiated-generic.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/implicit-panic-call.rs ... FAILED
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/instantiation-through-vtable.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/items-within-generic-items.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/non-generic-drop-glue.rs ... ok
---
---- [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/implicit-panic-call.rs stdout ----

These items should have been contained but were not:

MONO_ITEM fn <i32 as Div>::div
MONO_ITEM fn panic_div_overflow



thread '[codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/implicit-panic-call.rs' panicked at src/tools/compiletest/src/runtest/codegen_units.rs:111:13:
fatal error

For more information how to resolve CI failures of this job, visit this link.

rust-bors · 2025-11-10T04:23:56Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 1ca5083 (1ca50832f4df08d14a3dbf818d485d223d7cfc84, parent: 6647be93640686a2a443a49f15c3390b68c8b5dd)

rust-timer · 2025-11-10T06:18:55Z

Finished benchmarking commit (1ca5083): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.8%	[0.4%, 1.4%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-1.1%, -0.5%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.1%	[-0.2%, -0.1%]	5
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-1.1%, 1.4%]	6

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.3%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.3%	[-2.3%, -2.3%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.3%	[-2.3%, -2.3%]	2

Cycles

Results (secondary 4.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.0%	[4.0%, 4.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

Results (primary -0.2%, secondary 0.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.4%]	14
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.4%	[0.4%, 0.4%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.8%	[-2.9%, -0.1%]	5
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-2.9%, 0.4%]	19

Bootstrap: 475.519s -> 476.038s (0.11%)
Artifact size: 391.32 MiB -> 391.26 MiB (-0.01%)

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 Oct 25, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Oct 25, 2023

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 25, 2023

Auto merge of rust-lang#117192 - saethlin:leaves-can-assert, r=<try>

4729728

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining r? `@ghost`

saethlin added S-experimental Status: Ongoing experiment that does not require reviewing and won't be merged in its current state. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Oct 25, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Oct 26, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Oct 26, 2023

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 26, 2023

Auto merge of rust-lang#117192 - saethlin:leaves-can-assert, r=<try>

4ddfadb

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining r? `@ghost`

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Oct 26, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Oct 26, 2023

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 26, 2023

Auto merge of rust-lang#117192 - saethlin:leaves-can-assert, r=<try>

c7f0427

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining r? `@ghost`

rustbot removed the perf-regression Performance regression. label Nov 11, 2023

saethlin closed this Mar 11, 2024

saethlin deleted the leaves-can-assert branch March 11, 2024 22:30

saethlin restored the leaves-can-assert branch November 9, 2025 21:28

saethlin reopened this Nov 9, 2025

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Nov 9, 2025

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining

7262dbb

saethlin force-pushed the leaves-can-assert branch from f199d04 to 7262dbb Compare November 9, 2025 21:32

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 9, 2025

Auto merge of #117192 - saethlin:leaves-can-assert, r=<try>

b21ece8

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Nov 9, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Nov 10, 2025

Raise the limit to something silly

2b99084

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2025

Auto merge of #117192 - saethlin:leaves-can-assert, r=<try>

1ca5083

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Nov 10, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Nov 10, 2025

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining #117192

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Don't treat asserts as a call in cross-crate inlining #117192

Conversation

saethlin commented Oct 25, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Oct 25, 2023

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Oct 25, 2023

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Oct 25, 2023

Uh oh!

bors commented Oct 25, 2023

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Oct 26, 2023

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Oct 26, 2023

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Oct 26, 2023

Uh oh!

bors commented Oct 26, 2023

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Oct 26, 2023

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Oct 26, 2023

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Oct 26, 2023

Uh oh!

bors commented Oct 26, 2023

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Mar 11, 2024

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Nov 9, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented Nov 10, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Nov 10, 2025

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Nov 10, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rust-log-analyzer commented Nov 10, 2025

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Nov 10, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Nov 10, 2025

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

saethlin commented Oct 25, 2023 •

edited

Loading