[PERF] How much does lowering the spans in AttrPath matter?

[JonathanBrouwer]

Not sure how correct this is, don't merge this.

[JonathanBrouwer]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: d9eae17 (d9eae17767db0f7c6391226cad0d92eee5466f69, parent: 5bc345055b06dc096b01bc6d1e0cbe92d3cc630e)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (d9eae17): 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%	[0.2%, 0.5%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.9%	[1.9%, 1.9%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.2%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.3%	[0.2%, 0.5%]	2

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.5%, secondary 3.1%)

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)	3.1%	[3.1%, 3.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.5%	[-1.5%, -1.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.5%	[-1.5%, -1.5%]	1

Cycles

Results (primary -2.6%, secondary -3.8%)

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)	-2.6%	[-2.6%, -2.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.8%	[-3.8%, -3.8%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.6%	[-2.6%, -2.6%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary -0.0%, 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%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-0.0%, -0.0%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-0.0%, -0.0%]	6

Bootstrap: 473.701s -> 471.996s (-0.36%)
Artifact size: 389.02 MiB -> 389.02 MiB (-0.00%)

[JonathanBrouwer]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[JonathanBrouwer]

@bors try cancel

[rust-bors]

Try build cancelled. Cancelled workflows:

• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/actions/runs/20057460189

[JonathanBrouwer]

@bors try

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job pr-check-2 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

[RUSTC-TIMING] form_urlencoded test:false 0.073
[RUSTC-TIMING] serde test:false 0.543
    Checking tracing-error v0.2.1
[RUSTC-TIMING] tracing_error test:false 0.083
error[E0599]: no method named `ident_path` found for reference `&&A` in the current scope
  --> src/tools/clippy/clippy_utils/src/attrs.rs:24:48
   |
24 |         if let Some([clippy, segment2]) = attr.ident_path().as_deref()
   |                                                ^^^^^^^^^^ method not found in `&&A`

[RUSTC-TIMING] toml_edit test:false 1.432
    Checking toml v0.7.8
error[E0599]: no method named `ident` found for reference `&rustc_ast::Attribute` in the current scope
   --> src/tools/clippy/clippy_utils/src/check_proc_macro.rs:351:39

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: f3efcc9 (f3efcc98a6728b73780875235e1a77ae38c2c3ba, parent: 018d26972e523b8d28f9579056185a1713949dfd)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (f3efcc9): 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)	0.3%	[0.1%, 0.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.3%, -0.1%]	7
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.5%, -0.1%]	24
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.3%, -0.1%]	7

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.3%, secondary -1.2%)

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)	-2.3%	[-3.5%, -0.6%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.2%	[-1.2%, -1.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.3%	[-3.5%, -0.6%]	3

Cycles

Results (primary 2.1%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.1%	[2.1%, 2.1%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.1%	[2.1%, 2.1%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary -0.1%, 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
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.2%, -0.0%]	32
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.0%	[-0.1%, -0.0%]	15
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.2%, -0.0%]	32

Bootstrap: 472.223s -> 472.69s (0.10%)
Artifact size: 389.03 MiB -> 389.01 MiB (-0.01%)