remove a performance hack #148066
remove a performance hack #148066
Conversation
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
remove a performance hack
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-perf
lcnr
force-pushed
the
remove-perf-hack
branch
from
148e4ae to
561e3ce
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (d0ec043): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action neededBenchmarking 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. @bors rollup=never Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. CyclesResults (primary 2.1%, secondary 2.9%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 475.14s -> 475.927s (0.17%) |
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-perf
|
looks irrelevant for the new solver and I don't want perf opts in the trait solver if we don't have a test where they matter. The last beta cutoff was yesterday, so we have a whole 12 weeks before this hits stable in case something does rely on its use in coherence. If so, I want to get another test for it. |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors r+ tying random stuff to the recursion limit is always fun |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
What is this?This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.Comparing 34f954f (parent) -> cc63a0a (this PR) Test differencesShow 1 test diff1 doctest diff were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy. Test dashboardRun cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
test-dashboard cc63a0abde59a0de58ced46a2a882364f967632c --output-dir test-dashboardAnd then open Job duration changes
How to interpret the job duration changes?Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (cc63a0a): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. CyclesResults (primary -2.8%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 475.237s -> 475.029s (-0.04%) |
|
cc @rust-lang/types realized this probably would have officially required an FCP, and even if I still don't really know about that, I do think I should at least ping you all. |
5 participants
This hack seems no longer used 🤔 nalgebra compiles without it.
It looks irrelevant for the new solver and I don't want perf opts in the trait solver if we don't have a test where they matter.
The last beta cutoff was yesterday, so we have a whole 12 weeks before this hits stable in case something does rely on its use in coherence. If so, I want to get another test for it.
r? @BoxyUwU