Skip to content

Conversation

cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

@cjgillot cjgillot commented Oct 8, 2025

The current implementation starts by transforming all instances of _1 into (*_1), and then traverses the body again to transform (*_1) into (*(_1.0)), and again for Derefer.

This PR changes the implementation to only traverse the body once. As _1.0 cannot be not modified inside the body (we just changed its type!), we have no risk of loading from the wrong pointer.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 8, 2025

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

@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 Oct 8, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 8, 2025

r? @BoxyUwU

rustbot has assigned @BoxyUwU.
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

@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor Author

cjgillot commented Oct 8, 2025

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2025
StateTransform: Only load pin field once.
@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Oct 8, 2025
@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Oct 8, 2025

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 8a45031 (8a45031b817c65c13e267ee4f0c1aa833399b480, parent: 7a52736039856a3626eefec32d80c9df900b7afd)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (8a45031): 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
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.1%, 0.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.9% [-1.9%, -0.2%] 16
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -5.2%)

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)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-5.2% [-5.2%, -5.2%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results (secondary 0.3%)

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)
1.9% [1.5%, 2.4%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.9% [-2.9%, -2.9%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

Results (primary -0.0%, secondary -1.8%)

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)
-0.0% [-0.1%, -0.0%] 7
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.8% [-6.0%, -0.2%] 12
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.0% [-0.1%, -0.0%] 7

Bootstrap: 472.232s -> 472.472s (0.05%)
Artifact size: 388.41 MiB -> 388.41 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 Oct 9, 2025
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 9, 2025

This PR was rebased onto a different master commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

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.

5 participants