Make lowering incremental, take 3/N

[cjgillot]

View all comments

Rebase of #88186 that was rebased by #127262

No real change in design, so I'm not expecting a perf miracle.

r? @ghost

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 0e2f90b with merge a6b131d...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: a6b131d (a6b131d42573c085b032a153779366b448148b9d)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (a6b131d): 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)	0.8%	[0.2%, 1.8%]	157
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.1%	[0.2%, 4.3%]	69
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.5%, -0.3%]	5
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.2%]	7
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.7%	[-0.5%, 1.8%]	162

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 10.5%, secondary 10.1%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	10.5%	[3.1%, 28.6%]	249
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	10.1%	[2.2%, 31.4%]	142
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	10.5%	[3.1%, 28.6%]	249

Cycles

Results (primary 2.5%, secondary 4.1%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.5%	[1.4%, 5.5%]	35
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.1%	[1.8%, 7.5%]	22
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[1.4%, 5.5%]	35

Binary size

Results (primary -0.1%, secondary -0.2%)

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)	-0.1%	[-0.2%, -0.0%]	82
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.9%, -0.0%]	43
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.2%, -0.0%]	82

Bootstrap: 690.042s -> 689.298s (-0.11%)
Artifact size: 371.86 MiB -> 371.81 MiB (-0.01%)

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 8ab4e63 with merge 31325ff...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 31325ff (31325ff312ad91d8a2dd156c832cacc0435f9ea1)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (31325ff): 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)	0.5%	[0.2%, 1.3%]	120
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.8%	[0.2%, 3.2%]	77
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-1.3%, -0.2%]	12
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.6%	[-1.3%, -0.2%]	37
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-1.3%, 1.3%]	132

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 10.8%, secondary 10.4%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	10.8%	[2.3%, 29.1%]	248
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	10.4%	[1.9%, 31.7%]	143
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	10.8%	[2.3%, 29.1%]	248

Cycles

Results (primary 2.1%, secondary 4.1%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.1%	[1.2%, 3.8%]	20
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.1%	[1.7%, 6.6%]	16
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.1%	[1.2%, 3.8%]	20

Binary size

Results (primary -0.1%, secondary -0.2%)

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)	-0.1%	[-0.2%, -0.0%]	83
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.9%, -0.0%]	43
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.2%, -0.0%]	83

Bootstrap: 689.082s -> 688.79s (-0.04%)
Artifact size: 371.89 MiB -> 371.87 MiB (-0.00%)

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 17ec119 (17ec1195ef19bfa5acb47cf898f45b645febd0b5, parent: 2f201bccb3a7fb5a85b0fcfcc0a020a946d6d58a)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (17ec119): 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)	0.8%	[0.2%, 2.4%]	152
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.1%	[0.0%, 4.4%]	111
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.0%	[-0.0%, -0.0%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.7%	[-0.4%, 2.4%]	154

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 3.9%, 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)	3.9%	[0.9%, 13.2%]	159
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.7%	[1.8%, 9.0%]	55
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-5.7%	[-7.9%, -2.5%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.9%	[0.9%, 13.2%]	159

Cycles

Results (primary 3.2%, secondary 5.7%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.6%	[2.1%, 5.5%]	17
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	6.1%	[2.4%, 22.5%]	22
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.1%	[-3.1%, -3.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.7%	[-3.7%, -3.7%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.2%	[-3.1%, 5.5%]	18

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 491.618s -> 489.219s (-0.49%)
Artifact size: 394.25 MiB -> 394.05 MiB (-0.05%)

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[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)

    Checking rustc_builtin_macros v0.0.0 (/checkout/compiler/rustc_builtin_macros)
error: using `.clone()` on a ref-counted pointer
   --> compiler/rustc_ast_lowering/src/lib.rs:479:59
    |
479 |     let index = index.into_iter().map(|owner| Steal::new((resolver.clone(), owner))).collect();
    |                                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: try: `std::sync::Arc::<rustc_middle::ty::ResolverAstLowering<'_>>::clone(&resolver)`
    |
    = help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#clone_on_ref_ptr
    = note: requested on the command line with `-D clippy::clone-on-ref-ptr`

[RUSTC-TIMING] rustc_ast_lowering test:false 4.121

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 07c7aca (07c7aca5a99209ea32d6ca239999f1145d70f8f2, parent: 68ffae46b581747074413e4242ab0c6ecc4db4a9)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (07c7aca): 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)	0.7%	[0.2%, 2.4%]	163
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.1%	[0.0%, 4.3%]	107
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.5%	[-0.5%, -0.4%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.0%	[-0.0%, -0.0%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.7%	[-0.5%, 2.4%]	165

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 3.1%, 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)	3.1%	[1.0%, 10.9%]	140
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.7%	[0.9%, 6.8%]	31
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.5%	[-7.5%, -1.5%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.1%	[1.0%, 10.9%]	140

Cycles

Results (primary 3.6%, secondary 4.1%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.6%	[2.8%, 4.9%]	12
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.1%	[1.6%, 6.4%]	19
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.6%	[2.8%, 4.9%]	12

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 488.457s -> 494.788s (1.30%)
Artifact size: 393.89 MiB -> 393.92 MiB (0.01%)