[experiment] Test perf when unconditionally `EvaluatedToUnknown` on inductive cycles #115107

compiler-errors · 2023-08-22T16:37:08Z

#114023 (comment)

r? @ghost

compiler-errors · 2023-08-22T16:37:15Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-08-22T16:37:24Z

⌛ Trying commit 5602412a8dd2e220e67254711a81b43a819e79f4 with merge c69c223bc2201116b322998681274bffea3c17bf...

compiler-errors · 2023-08-22T17:01:43Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-08-22T17:01:53Z

⌛ Trying commit 6f28acf with merge 29e0914f2fd5b07007a56c9c3444e3fae6bfc3d6...

bors · 2023-08-22T18:14:24Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 29e0914f2fd5b07007a56c9c3444e3fae6bfc3d6 (29e0914f2fd5b07007a56c9c3444e3fae6bfc3d6)

rust-timer · 2023-08-23T05:56:30Z

Finished benchmarking commit (29e0914f2fd5b07007a56c9c3444e3fae6bfc3d6): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no 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.

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

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 634.51s -> 635.343s (0.13%)
Artifact size: 346.98 MiB -> 346.87 MiB (-0.03%)

compiler-errors · 2023-08-23T06:00:56Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-08-23T06:01:04Z

⌛ Trying commit 800a212 with merge 456b31d839a5e923a1da2b0985d1c511afd3a47b...

bors · 2023-08-23T07:13:43Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 456b31d839a5e923a1da2b0985d1c511afd3a47b (456b31d839a5e923a1da2b0985d1c511afd3a47b)

rust-timer · 2023-08-23T12:42:18Z

Finished benchmarking commit (456b31d839a5e923a1da2b0985d1c511afd3a47b): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no 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.

@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)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	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.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.2%	[-1.2%, -1.2%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 634.141s -> 635.741s (0.25%)
Artifact size: 347.08 MiB -> 347.08 MiB (-0.00%)

compiler-errors · 2023-08-24T19:08:45Z

Uhh...? Doesn't look like caching is the problem here either.

rust-log-analyzer · 2023-08-24T19:36:32Z

The job x86_64-gnu-llvm-15 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

GITHUB_ACTION=__run_7
GITHUB_ACTIONS=true
GITHUB_ACTION_REF=
GITHUB_ACTION_REPOSITORY=
GITHUB_ACTOR=rust-cloud-vms[bot]
GITHUB_API_URL=https://api.github.com
GITHUB_BASE_REF=master
GITHUB_ENV=/home/runner/work/_temp/_runner_file_commands/set_env_66c3d6c3-b33d-4f75-a7e8-fc3dda892f70
GITHUB_EVENT_NAME=pull_request
GITHUB_EVENT_NAME=pull_request
GITHUB_EVENT_PATH=/home/runner/work/_temp/_github_workflow/event.json
GITHUB_GRAPHQL_URL=https://api.github.com/graphql
GITHUB_HEAD_REF=ambig-always
GITHUB_JOB=pr
GITHUB_PATH=/home/runner/work/_temp/_runner_file_commands/add_path_66c3d6c3-b33d-4f75-a7e8-fc3dda892f70
GITHUB_REF=refs/pull/115107/merge
GITHUB_REF_NAME=115107/merge
GITHUB_REF_PROTECTED=false
---
GITHUB_SERVER_URL=https://github.com
GITHUB_SHA=4137aae90270e0467e6e05cca55dea2e4d16deb2
GITHUB_STATE=/home/runner/work/_temp/_runner_file_commands/save_state_66c3d6c3-b33d-4f75-a7e8-fc3dda892f70
GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY=/home/runner/work/_temp/_runner_file_commands/step_summary_66c3d6c3-b33d-4f75-a7e8-fc3dda892f70
GITHUB_TRIGGERING_ACTOR=rust-cloud-vms[bot]
GITHUB_WORKFLOW_REF=rust-lang/rust/.github/workflows/ci.yml@refs/pull/115107/merge
GITHUB_WORKFLOW_SHA=4137aae90270e0467e6e05cca55dea2e4d16deb2
GITHUB_WORKSPACE=/home/runner/work/rust/rust
GOROOT_1_18_X64=/opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.18.10/x64

compiler-errors · 2023-08-28T00:08:47Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2023-08-28T00:08:56Z

⌛ Trying commit 7052175 with merge a2acefed2cb8955e9830e6a1664a6e36f49e28f2...

bors · 2023-08-28T01:18:45Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: a2acefed2cb8955e9830e6a1664a6e36f49e28f2 (a2acefed2cb8955e9830e6a1664a6e36f49e28f2)

rust-timer · 2023-08-28T06:24:14Z

Finished benchmarking commit (a2acefed2cb8955e9830e6a1664a6e36f49e28f2): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no 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.

@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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-2.5%, -0.6%]	10
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-2.5%, -0.6%]	10

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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.3%	[2.3%, 2.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-2.9%, -1.2%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.7%	[-3.2%, -2.2%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-2.9%, -1.2%]	6

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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.8%	[-3.3%, -2.4%]	4
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.8%	[-3.3%, -2.4%]	4

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 630.803s -> 631.593s (0.13%)
Artifact size: 316.08 MiB -> 316.00 MiB (-0.03%)

aliemjay · 2023-08-28T07:14:27Z

I think we can get away with no spans in the lint given that we spell out the failing predicate in the error message.

…liemjay Don't record spans for predicates in coherence Should improve perf (rust-lang#115107 (comment)) for rust-lang#114023 (comment) r? aliemjay

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 Aug 22, 2023