Skip to content

Conversation

bvanjoi
Copy link
Contributor

@bvanjoi bvanjoi commented Sep 2, 2025

Fixes #145741

Performance test results from local for #145741:

time cargo clean && cargo build: 20.60s
time cargo +stage1 clean && cargo +stage1 build: 11.29s

I'm uncertain if this is a completely correct fix, as I've just reviewed the privacy update logic and it appears that a single update should suffice in the alias term. Feel free to close this if there are any algorithmic inaccuracies, and I'll investigate further.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Sep 2, 2025

r? @SparrowLii

rustbot has assigned @SparrowLii.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@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 Sep 2, 2025
@lqd
Copy link
Member

lqd commented Sep 2, 2025

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 2, 2025
privacy: cache for trait ref in projection
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Sep 2, 2025
@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Sep 2, 2025

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 97bca8b (97bca8b377025fbbb752947ef69ee3c8bc9ec6f5, parent: a2c8b0b92c14b02f0b3f96a0d5296f1090dc286b)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (97bca8b): 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)
0.1% [0.1%, 0.2%] 12
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.1%, 0.2%] 5
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.3% [-0.4%, -0.1%] 7
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.0% [-0.4%, 0.2%] 19

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.1%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
1.3% [1.3%, 1.3%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.6% [-1.6%, -1.6%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.1% [-1.6%, 1.3%] 2

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: 465.026s -> 467.402s (0.51%)
Artifact size: 388.33 MiB -> 388.34 MiB (0.00%)

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Sep 2, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
perf-regression Performance regression. 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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Exponential slow down in compilation speed (because of visiblity checking?)
5 participants