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

Enable MIR inlinig for #[inline(always)] when mir-opt-level=1 #105278

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Enable MIR inlinig for #[inline(always)] when mir-opt-level=1 #105278

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

eduardosm
Copy link
Contributor

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Dec 4, 2022

r? @davidtwco

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added 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. labels Dec 4, 2022
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Dec 4, 2022

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Dec 5, 2022

@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 Dec 5, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 5, 2022

⌛ Trying commit 8ea2dd0 with merge f96b506b3944049aa409b78d6fbfc86db517fd76...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 5, 2022

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: f96b506b3944049aa409b78d6fbfc86db517fd76 (f96b506b3944049aa409b78d6fbfc86db517fd76)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (f96b506b3944049aa409b78d6fbfc86db517fd76): 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-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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
4.8% [0.2%, 29.7%] 72
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.6% [0.1%, 4.4%] 18
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.1% [-4.1%, -0.5%] 6
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.1% [-1.1%, -1.1%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 4.3% [-4.1%, 29.7%] 78

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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
6.0% [0.4%, 16.4%] 38
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.2% [-2.2%, -2.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 5.8% [-2.2%, 16.4%] 39

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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
6.4% [0.8%, 20.8%] 38
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.6% [1.6%, 5.2%] 8
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-3.1% [-3.6%, -2.4%] 4
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.3% [-1.3%, -1.3%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 5.5% [-3.6%, 20.8%] 42

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Dec 5, 2022
@eduardosm eduardosm marked this pull request as draft December 6, 2022 16:23
@davidtwco
Copy link
Member

r? @oli-obk

@rustbot rustbot assigned oli-obk and unassigned davidtwco Jan 7, 2023
}
_ => true,
}
sess.mir_opt_level() > 0
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We need to keep the incremental opt-out that existed for opt-level=2. So I think all that should be done here is to move the | 1 to the second match arm.

@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Jan 10, 2023

@rustbot author

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 10, 2023
@eduardosm
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing in favor of #110560

@eduardosm eduardosm closed this May 1, 2023
@eduardosm eduardosm deleted the mir-opt-1-inline-always branch May 1, 2023 11:10
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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. 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