Skip to content

Don't do expensive HIR walk to collect nested bodies #141057

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.

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

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

An attempt to claw back some perf hit from the HIR-based impl of nested_bodies_within.

r? @ghost

@rustbot rustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label May 15, 2025
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label May 15, 2025
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 15, 2025
Don't do expensive HIR walk to collect nested bodies

An attempt to claw back some perf hit from the HIR-based impl of `nested_bodies_within`.

r? `@ghost`
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 15, 2025

⌛ Trying commit dc17ef9 with merge 25c39ae...

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 16, 2025

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 25c39ae (25c39aef47124c05c74b591fef2bab32da31ada6)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (25c39ae): comparison URL.

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

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

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

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.3% [0.1%, 1.0%] 47
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.5% [0.2%, 0.8%] 6
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.0%] 4
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.1%] 6
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.3% [-0.1%, 1.0%] 51

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -5.1%, secondary -2.6%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-5.1% [-5.1%, -5.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.6% [-2.6%, -2.6%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) -5.1% [-5.1%, -5.1%] 1

Cycles

Results (primary 1.3%, secondary 2.1%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
1.3% [1.3%, 1.3%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.1% [2.1%, 2.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.3% [1.3%, 1.3%] 1

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 773.554s -> 774.6s (0.14%)
Artifact size: 365.48 MiB -> 365.34 MiB (-0.04%)

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels May 16, 2025
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member 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 May 18, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 18, 2025

⌛ Trying commit 66bcf0b with merge 53e91048a3c8ffbc577016f6811a9bf04e949eea...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 18, 2025
Don't do expensive HIR walk to collect nested bodies

An attempt to claw back some perf hit from the HIR-based impl of `nested_bodies_within`.

r? `@ghost`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
perf-regression Performance regression. S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants