Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Simplify encoder and decoder #83273

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 22, 2021
Merged

Simplify encoder and decoder #83273

merged 4 commits into from
Mar 22, 2021

Conversation

cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

Extracted from #83036 and #82780.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @lcnr

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Mar 18, 2021
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@joshtriplett
Copy link
Member

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 18, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 18, 2021

⌛ Trying commit ccef537b0366d1ced16cf212d385aa1707a5794f with merge bf696c7a499ba76acd374ad810be4e05f17460b9...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 18, 2021

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: bf696c7a499ba76acd374ad810be4e05f17460b9 (bf696c7a499ba76acd374ad810be4e05f17460b9)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued bf696c7a499ba76acd374ad810be4e05f17460b9 with parent 9d0446f, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking try commit (bf696c7a499ba76acd374ad810be4e05f17460b9): comparison url.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying rollup- to bors.

Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 18, 2021
@joshtriplett
Copy link
Member

This provides a decent improvement on max-rss, but regresses on instructions.

@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 18, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 18, 2021

⌛ Trying commit 637253f5263e9d8abf2b522553c64ab80d53f358 with merge 0f5649699bc49e9345864d7b99c11697dd8506f3...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 18, 2021

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 0f5649699bc49e9345864d7b99c11697dd8506f3 (0f5649699bc49e9345864d7b99c11697dd8506f3)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued 0f5649699bc49e9345864d7b99c11697dd8506f3 with parent 1705a7d, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking try commit (0f5649699bc49e9345864d7b99c11697dd8506f3): comparison url.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying rollup- to bors.

Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 19, 2021
@joshtriplett
Copy link
Member

Still appears to be a substantial regression, unfortunately.

@michaelwoerister
Copy link
Member

I've done a few similar things in c49297d (part of #82183). I did not see performance regressions there. Maybe that's of interest.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 19, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 19, 2021

⌛ Trying commit 11b3409 with merge 58740d89a14c455cd96c58a6dc4a3478d8cb854c...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 19, 2021

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 58740d89a14c455cd96c58a6dc4a3478d8cb854c (58740d89a14c455cd96c58a6dc4a3478d8cb854c)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued 58740d89a14c455cd96c58a6dc4a3478d8cb854c with parent 9f4bc3e, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking try commit (58740d89a14c455cd96c58a6dc4a3478d8cb854c): comparison url.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying rollup- to bors.

Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 20, 2021

@rust-timer: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: not in try users

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 20, 2021
@Aaron1011
Copy link
Member

cc @rust-lang/infra ^ - it looks like the permissions for rust-timer are messed up somehow.

@bjorn3
Copy link
Member

bjorn3 commented Mar 20, 2021

Improvements up to 1.5%.

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Mar 20, 2021

can someone else take this over, I don't have a lot of capacity rn

r? @michaelwoerister maybe, feel free to reassign

@michaelwoerister
Copy link
Member

Looks good to me. I'm still not a fan of all that unsafe code and most of it can be removed as c49297d demonstrates.

I'd also prefer if read_raw_bytes would just borrow the underlying data instead of copying it to &mut [MaybeUninit<u8>]. That works with the opaque decoder but can't be done if read_raw_bytes is moved to the Decoder trait, as this PR does. I hope we can make that change once we get rid of JSON encoding as rust-lang/compiler-team#418 proposes.

But for now this PR is still a strict improvement.

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 22, 2021

📌 Commit 11b3409 has been approved by michaelwoerister

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Mar 22, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 22, 2021

⌛ Testing commit 11b3409 with merge d04c3aa...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 22, 2021

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: michaelwoerister
Pushing d04c3aa to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Mar 22, 2021
@bors bors merged commit d04c3aa into rust-lang:master Mar 22, 2021
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.53.0 milestone Mar 22, 2021
This was referenced Mar 22, 2021
Closed
Merged
Merged
@cjgillot cjgillot deleted the endecode branch March 22, 2021 17:31
@michaelwoerister michaelwoerister mentioned this pull request Mar 25, 2021
Merged
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2021
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#83465 - michaelwoerister:safe-read_raw_bytes,…
0ced530 
… r=cjgillot

Allow for reading raw bytes from rustc_serialize::Decoder without unsafe code

The current `read_raw_bytes` method requires using `MaybeUninit` and `unsafe`. I don't think this is necessary. Let's see if a safe interface has any performance drawbacks.

This is a followup to rust-lang#83273 and will make it easier to rebase rust-lang#82183.

r? `@cjgillot`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@michaelwoerister michaelwoerister

Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.53.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet