Skip to content

Conversation

@Zalathar
Copy link
Contributor

The new chaining structure turned out to have unexpected perf consequences.


This reverts commit 3d95159.

r? ghost (until a perf run confirms that the revert is good)

The new chaining structure turned out to have unexpected perf consequences.

This reverts commit 3d95159.
@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 25, 2025
@Zalathar
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 25, 2025
Revert "Streamline iterator chaining when computing successors."
@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 25, 2025
@Zalathar
Copy link
Contributor Author

Per #148054 (comment) I no longer intend to merge this, but I'll let the perf job continue to confirm that a revert would resolve the perf regression.

@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Oct 25, 2025

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 1d89aee (1d89aeeed0bcd8d39f69adb36812312f90750391, parent: f435972085b697a1ece8ee6a1ac76efff8d1df7b)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (1d89aee): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

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.

@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
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.2% [-0.4%, -0.1%] 31
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.4%, -0.0%] 26
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.2% [-0.4%, -0.1%] 31

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.2%, secondary 1.6%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.2% [2.2%, 2.2%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.6% [0.5%, 4.4%] 4
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.2% [2.2%, 2.2%] 1

Cycles

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

Binary size

Results (secondary 0.0%)

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)
0.0% [0.0%, 0.0%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Bootstrap: 474.979s -> 474.299s (-0.14%)
Artifact size: 390.46 MiB -> 390.46 MiB (-0.00%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Oct 25, 2025
@Zalathar
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this PR, and leaving any revert/fix up to the original author instead.

@Zalathar Zalathar closed this Oct 25, 2025
@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Oct 25, 2025
@Zalathar Zalathar deleted the revert-successors branch October 25, 2025 04:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

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.

3 participants