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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

change FnMutDelegate to trait objects #101857

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 17, 2022
Merged

change FnMutDelegate to trait objects #101857

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 17, 2022

Conversation

lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

@lcnr lcnr commented Sep 15, 2022

cc #100016 as mentioned in the last t-compiler meeting

r? @jackh726

@rustbot rustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Sep 15, 2022
@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 15, 2022
@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor Author

lcnr commented Sep 15, 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 Sep 15, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 15, 2022

⌛ Trying commit 5669ce1 with merge cbad642839eed1ec09ba792a70269bef9fec4890...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 15, 2022

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cbad642839eed1ec09ba792a70269bef9fec4890 (cbad642839eed1ec09ba792a70269bef9fec4890)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued cbad642839eed1ec09ba792a70269bef9fec4890 with parent 294f0ee, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (cbad642839eed1ec09ba792a70269bef9fec4890): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

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-review -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean1 range count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 0.7% [0.4%, 0.9%] 7
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 1.0% [0.2%, 2.3%] 12
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -1.8% [-2.5%, -1.3%] 6
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.7% [0.4%, 0.9%] 7

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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.

mean1 range count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 2.9% [2.9%, 2.9%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 4.1% [4.1%, 4.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -6.2% [-6.2%, -6.2%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.9% [2.9%, 2.9%] 1

Cycles

Results

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.

mean1 range count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 3.7% [3.7%, 3.7%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -9.9% [-9.9%, -9.9%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -9.9% [-9.9%, -9.9%] 1

Footnotes

  1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩2 ↩3

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Sep 15, 2022
@jackh726
Copy link
Member

There is a slight regression in diesel benchmarks, mix in secondary, and a ~1.5% win in bootstrap times. I think this is worth merging.

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor Author

lcnr commented Sep 16, 2022

yeah, the regressions seem acceptable 👍

@bors r=jackh726 rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 16, 2022

📌 Commit 5669ce1 has been approved by jackh726

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Sep 16, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 17, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 5669ce1 with merge 48de123...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 17, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jackh726
Pushing 48de123 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Sep 17, 2022
@bors bors merged commit 48de123 into rust-lang:master Sep 17, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.65.0 milestone Sep 17, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (48de123): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean1 range count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 1.2% [0.9%, 1.6%] 9
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -1.2% [-1.2%, -1.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.2% [-1.2%, -1.2%] 1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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.

mean1 range count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 0.9% [0.9%, 0.9%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 1.2% [1.2%, 1.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -2.1% [-3.2%, -1.6%] 6
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -1.8% [-2.2%, -1.6%] 4
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.6% [-3.2%, 0.9%] 7

Cycles

Results

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.

mean1 range count2
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 5.0% [4.9%, 5.0%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -2.5% [-2.5%, -2.5%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Footnotes

  1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩2 ↩3

@lcnr lcnr deleted the make-dyn-again branch September 19, 2022 08:47
@bors bors mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2022
Closed
@lcnr lcnr mentioned this pull request Sep 21, 2022
Closed
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Apr 13, 2024
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@jackh726 jackh726

Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.65.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@lcnr @rust-timer @bors @jackh726 @rust-highfive @rustbot