Switch benchmarks back to instrumentation mode

[Swatinem]

The walltime instrumentation is only usable on codspeed bare metal runners, which we don’t currently use.

In the meantime, it would be nice to get some kind of result for the benchmark, even if it takes a long time.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.73%. Comparing base (e9567e6) to head (0388cae).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #555   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.73%   88.73%           
=======================================
  Files         459      459           
  Lines       13130    13130           
  Branches     1510     1510           
=======================================
  Hits        11651    11651           
  Misses       1163     1163           
  Partials      316      316           

Flag	Coverage Δ
shared-docker-uploader	88.73% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[codecov-notifications]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #555 will create unknown performance changes

_{Comparing swatinem/useful-bench (0388cae) with main (e9567e6)}

Summary

🆕 17 new benchmarks

Benchmarks breakdown

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Change
🆕	test_parse_full[ReadOnlyReport]	N/A	563.5 ms	N/A
🆕	test_parse_full[Report]	N/A	562.2 ms	N/A
🆕	test_parse_full[Rust ReadOnlyReport]	N/A	563.6 ms	N/A
🆕	test_parse_shallow[ReadOnlyReport]	N/A	7.4 ms	N/A
🆕	test_parse_shallow[Report]	N/A	7.2 ms	N/A
🆕	test_parse_shallow[Rust ReadOnlyReport]	N/A	7.5 ms	N/A
🆕	test_process_totals[ReadOnlyReport]	N/A	667.1 ms	N/A
🆕	test_process_totals[Report]	N/A	667 ms	N/A
🆕	test_process_totals[Rust ReadOnlyReport]	N/A	673.1 ms	N/A
🆕	test_report_carryforward	N/A	6.1 ms	N/A
🆕	test_report_diff_calculation[FilteredReport]	N/A	3.1 ms	N/A
🆕	test_report_diff_calculation[Report]	N/A	2 ms	N/A
🆕	test_report_filtering[ReadOnlyReport]	N/A	2.5 s	N/A
🆕	test_report_filtering[Report]	N/A	2.5 s	N/A
🆕	test_report_filtering[Rust ReadOnlyReport]	N/A	2.5 s	N/A
🆕	test_report_merge	N/A	3.1 s	N/A
🆕	test_report_serialize	N/A	4.8 ms	N/A

[joseph-sentry]

lgtm just not sure if we need the setup python action as well

[joseph-sentry]

do we need this since we're doing setup-uv already?

[Swatinem]

https://docs.codspeed.io/benchmarks/python#usage-with-uv mentions that you should still use that instead of the uv-provided python.