Skip to content

Conversation

cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

r? @ghost

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Oct 13, 2025
@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2025
@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 13, 2025
@saethlin
Copy link
Member

@cjgillot I've seen a number of small functions get unreasonably hot in local builds but get optimized fine in our dist toolchains. So I'm expecting this change to be perf-neutral, but I bet it improves dev workflows. So r=me if it's neutral or positive.

@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Oct 14, 2025

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 9d3be2e (9d3be2e1f7144845eec01478bfb26e943feea727, parent: ed1d94311e7ed53eabb5667ef577802d88d1aaee)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (9d3be2e): 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)
0.3% [0.1%, 0.4%] 13
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.1%] 3
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.2% [-0.1%, 0.4%] 16

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 5.3%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
5.3% [5.3%, 5.3%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 5.3% [5.3%, 5.3%] 1

Cycles

Results (secondary 4.8%)

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)
4.8% [4.8%, 4.8%] 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: 473.894s -> 474.704s (0.17%)
Artifact size: 388.15 MiB -> 388.13 MiB (-0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Oct 14, 2025
@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not worth the trouble.

@cjgillot cjgillot closed this Oct 14, 2025
@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Oct 14, 2025
@cjgillot cjgillot deleted the inline-lang-items branch October 14, 2025 02:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

perf-regression Performance regression. 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.

4 participants