Rollup of 5 pull requests

[matthiaskrgr]

Successful merges:

• Slice iter cleanup #146436 (Slice iter cleanup)
• array_chunks: slightly improve docs #148250 (array_chunks: slightly improve docs)
• Merge E0412 into E0425 #148678 (Merge E0412 into E0425)
• also introduce Peekable::next_if_map_mut next to next_if_map #149520 (also introduce Peekable::next_if_map_mut next to next_if_map)
• std: sys: fs: uefi: Make time in FileAttr optional #149538 (std: sys: fs: uefi: Make time in FileAttr optional)

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

[matthiaskrgr]

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

[bors]

📌 Commit 3b99d6b has been approved by matthiaskrgr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 3b99d6b with merge a4cfac7...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing a4cfac7 to main...

[rust-timer]

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR#	Message	Perf Build Sha
#146436	Slice iter cleanup	0311eecd8e49f98001cf963e686819ff780df33e (link)
#148250	array_chunks: slightly improve docs	0f86ccb7a1bcdf6eba4cd28eb9d71f7ee16b4371 (link)
#148678	Merge E0412 into E0425	63193da469ad1be935ca5d525ef59993e5364efb (link)
#149520	also introduce Peekable::next_if_map_mut next to next_if_map	8b59d65d37311b94a654419121bef5d4c99e52d6 (link)
#149538	std: sys: fs: uefi: Make time in FileAttr optional	5d9819082e7076df033ac3466bdb8bec5ffc5c91 (link)

previous master: 646a3f8c15

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

[github-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 646a3f8 (parent) -> a4cfac7 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 60 test diffs

Stage 1

• slice::test_chunks_zst: [missing] -> pass (J1)

Stage 2

• slice::test_chunks_zst: [missing] -> pass (J0)

Additionally, 58 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Job group index

• J0: aarch64-apple, aarch64-gnu, aarch64-gnu-llvm-20-1, aarch64-msvc-1, arm-android, armhf-gnu, dist-i586-gnu-i586-i686-musl, i686-gnu-1, i686-gnu-nopt-1, i686-msvc-1, test-various, x86_64-gnu, x86_64-gnu-aux, x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-2, x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-2, x86_64-gnu-nopt, x86_64-gnu-stable, x86_64-mingw-1, x86_64-msvc-1
• J1: pr-check-2, x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-3, x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-3

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard a4cfac7093a1c1c7fbdb6bc75d6b6dc4d385fc69 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

1. i686-gnu-2: 5074.3s -> 6025.1s (+18.7%)
2. x86_64-gnu-gcc: 2945.2s -> 3446.2s (+17.0%)
3. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 2664.2s -> 3097.1s (+16.3%)
4. aarch64-apple: 11160.6s -> 9372.4s (-16.0%)
5. i686-gnu-nopt-1: 7139.9s -> 8148.0s (+14.1%)
6. dist-x86_64-mingw: 8628.6s -> 9825.1s (+13.9%)
7. x86_64-gnu-llvm-20: 2456.2s -> 2778.8s (+13.1%)
8. dist-x86_64-apple: 9134.5s -> 7965.0s (-12.8%)
9. arm-android: 5656.0s -> 6364.0s (+12.5%)
10. armhf-gnu: 4915.4s -> 5457.1s (+11.0%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (a4cfac7): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Our benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR.
This might be an actual regression, but it can also be just noise.

Next Steps:

• If the regression was expected or you think it can be justified,
  please write a comment with sufficient written justification, and add
  @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged to it, to mark the regression as triaged.
• If you think that you know of a way to resolve the regression, try to create
  a new PR with a fix for the regression.
• If you do not understand the regression or you think that it is just noise,
  you can ask the @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance working group for help (members of this group
  were already notified of this PR).

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

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%, 0.1%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.6%, -0.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.6%, 0.1%]	3

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.1%, secondary 2.2%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.4%	[0.9%, 5.9%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.2%	[2.2%, 2.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.6%	[-3.6%, -3.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.1%	[-3.6%, 5.9%]	3

Cycles

Results (primary 6.6%, secondary 3.6%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	6.6%	[6.6%, 6.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.6%	[2.5%, 4.9%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	6.6%	[6.6%, 6.6%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.6%, 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)	0.6%	[0.6%, 0.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.0%	[0.0%, 0.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.6%	[0.6%, 0.6%]	1

Bootstrap: 468.916s -> 467.504s (-0.30%)
Artifact size: 386.75 MiB -> 386.75 MiB (-0.00%)