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.

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

[PERF] Revert "Auto merge of #93670 - erikdesjardins:noundef, r=nikic" #94106

Closed

Conversation

erikdesjardins
Copy link
Contributor

@erikdesjardins erikdesjardins commented Feb 17, 2022

This change caused a perf regression in debug builds, due to the cost of adding attributes: #93670 (comment)

The recent LLVM 14 merge (#93577) improved the performance of attribute-related code though, so it may have made this a nonissue.

I do not expect to merge this PR as-is: depending on perf results, I'll either do nothing (if reverting shows no/minimal improvement), or open a PR that makes us only add noundef (and related attrs) when optimizing (since they're only useful for optimizations, and the regression is only significant for debug builds).

@rustbot rustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Feb 17, 2022
@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 Feb 17, 2022
@tmiasko
Copy link
Contributor

tmiasko commented Feb 17, 2022

@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 Feb 17, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 17, 2022

⌛ Trying commit 4346bd1 with merge e6ad3f369d4d6850bc9d7e7d0093e30692701718...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 18, 2022

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: e6ad3f369d4d6850bc9d7e7d0093e30692701718 (e6ad3f369d4d6850bc9d7e7d0093e30692701718)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued e6ad3f369d4d6850bc9d7e7d0093e30692701718 with parent 30b3f35, future comparison URL.

@erikdesjardins
Copy link
Contributor Author

r? @ghost

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (e6ad3f369d4d6850bc9d7e7d0093e30692701718): comparison url.

Summary: This benchmark run did not return any relevant results. 24 results were found to be statistically significant but too small to be relevant.

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.

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

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Feb 18, 2022
@erikdesjardins
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hmm. It's slightly less significant, but probably still worth dealing with:

image

Opened #94127.

@erikdesjardins erikdesjardins deleted the noundef-revert branch February 18, 2022 19:37
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 26, 2022
At opt-level=0, apply only ABI-affecting attributes to functions

This should provide a small perf improvement for debug builds,
and should more than cancel out the perf regression from adding noundef (rust-lang#93670 (comment), rust-lang#94106).

r? `@nikic`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. 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.

7 participants