[TEST] Try a VecCache variant which uses a linear address space

[Zoxc]

No description provided.

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job aarch64-gnu-llvm-21-2 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

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

##[endgroup]
Executing "/scripts/stage_2_test_set2.sh"
+ /scripts/stage_2_test_set2.sh
+ '[' 1 == 1 ']'
+ echo 'PR_CI_JOB set; skipping tidy'
+ SKIP_TIDY='--skip tidy'
+ ../x.py --stage 2 test --skip tidy --skip tests --skip coverage-map --skip coverage-run --skip library --skip tidyselftest
PR_CI_JOB set; skipping tidy
##[group]Building bootstrap
    Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized] target(s) in 0.04s
##[endgroup]
---

error[E0600]: cannot apply unary operator `!` to type `()`
  --> compiler/rustc_data_structures/src/linear_vec_cache/tests.rs:65:13
   |
65 |     assert!(!storage.ensure_committed_for_index(10));
   |             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cannot apply unary operator `!`

For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0600`.
[RUSTC-TIMING] rustc_data_structures test:true 3.571
error: could not compile `rustc_data_structures` (lib test) due to 2 previous errors

[Zoxc]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: ca85e0e (ca85e0eca14d7a491fec506d2f74b35c82bd99fb, parent: ffccab6abef68b70c5e23cfbfb1ac7680104040d)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (ca85e0e): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read:

Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf.

Next, please: If you can, justify the regressions found in this try perf run in writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, fix the regressions and do another perf run. Neutral or positive results will clear the label automatically.

@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)	0.4%	[0.1%, 1.1%]	25
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.5%	[0.1%, 2.6%]	52
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-2.4%, -0.1%]	102
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.9%	[-2.5%, -0.0%]	92
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-2.4%, 1.1%]	127

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.8%, secondary 2.7%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.0%	[0.5%, 7.4%]	68
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.3%	[0.4%, 13.5%]	47
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.7%	[-3.2%, -2.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.7%	[-9.1%, -0.6%]	10
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.8%	[-3.2%, 7.4%]	70

Cycles

Results (primary 0.5%, secondary 1.5%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.2%	[3.0%, 3.4%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.5%	[0.5%, 5.6%]	18
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.2%	[-2.3%, -2.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.0%	[-6.1%, -0.6%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.5%	[-2.3%, 3.4%]	4

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
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-0.0%, -0.0%]	4
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.0%	[-0.1%, -0.0%]	14
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-0.0%, -0.0%]	4

Bootstrap: 497.124s -> 496.932s (-0.04%)
Artifact size: 395.05 MiB -> 394.71 MiB (-0.09%)