-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.9k
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
Specialize array cloning for Copy types #90755
Conversation
Because after PR 86041, the optimizer no longer load-merges at the LLVM IR level, which might be part of the perf loss. (I'll run perf and see if this makes a difference.) Also I added a codegen test so this hopefully won't regress in future -- it passes on stable and with my change here, but not on the 2021-11-09 nightly.
r? @m-ou-se (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
⌛ Trying commit cc7d801 with merge 87df9f91778c7252dc2e7eddbe858af73d6d444c... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Queued 87df9f91778c7252dc2e7eddbe858af73d6d444c with parent 8b09ba6, future comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking commit (87df9f91778c7252dc2e7eddbe858af73d6d444c): comparison url. Summary: This change led to moderate relevant mixed results 🤷 in compiler performance.
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. 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 led to changes in compiler perf. Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @bors rollup=never |
Hmm, this improvement in full-opt |
Maybe try adding |
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
⌛ Trying commit 5b115fc with merge 619d3f7524949f70494dc855c8252f8bd77376d2... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Queued 619d3f7524949f70494dc855c8252f8bd77376d2 with parent 68ca579, future comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking commit (619d3f7524949f70494dc855c8252f8bd77376d2): comparison url. Summary: This change led to moderate relevant mixed results 🤷 in compiler performance.
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. 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 led to changes in compiler perf. Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @bors rollup=never |
Okay so no difference with or without inline annotation. r=me, whether you remove those or not |
The method on @bors r=jackh726 |
📌 Commit 5b115fc has been approved by |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Targeted perf fix with mostly wins and a few small regressions. |
Finished benchmarking commit (62efba8): comparison url. Summary: This change led to small relevant mixed results 🤷 in compiler performance.
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression |
Because after PR 86041, the optimizer no longer load-merges at the LLVM IR level, which might be part of the perf loss. (I'll run perf and see if this makes a difference.)
Also I added a codegen test so this hopefully won't regress in future -- it passes on stable and with my change here, but not on the 2021-11-09 nightly.
Example on current nightly: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=release&edition=2021&gist=1f52d46fb8fc3ca3ac9f097390085ffa