compiler: Never debug_assert in codegen #127995
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-perf
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 20, 2024
…=<try> compiler: Never debug_assert in codegen In the name of Turing and his Hoarey heralds, assert our truths before creating a monster. Currently experimenting.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (aa45835): comparison URL. Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action neededBenchmarking 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 Instruction countThis is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (secondary 3.8%)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.
CyclesResults (secondary 2.8%)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.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 770.598s -> 769.008s (-0.21%) |
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-perf
The gains in performance are not worth the costs in correctness. This is partly because the gains are zero and the costs are unknown.
workingjubilee
force-pushed
the
say-turings-prayer
branch
from
8b49b44
to
ce7b069
Compare
|
r? compiler |
|
@bors rollup=never |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 23, 2024
…=BoxyUwU compiler: Never debug_assert in codegen In the name of Turing and his Hoarey heralds, assert our truths before creating a monster! The `rustc_codegen_llvm` and `rustc_codegen_ssa` crates are fairly critical for rustc's correctness. Small mistakes here can easily result in undefined behavior, since a "small mistake" can mean something like "link and execute the wrong code". We should probably run any and all asserts in these modules unconditionally on whether this is a "debug build", and damn the costs in performance. ...Especially because the costs in performance seem to be *nothing*. It is not clear how much correctness we gain here, but I'll take free correctness improvements.
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
I'm sorry? |
|
@bors retry spurious msvc error |
bors
removed
the
S-waiting-on-review
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (28e684b): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 3.2%)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.
CyclesResults (secondary -6.8%)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.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 771.005s -> 770.337s (-0.09%) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In the name of Turing and his Hoarey heralds, assert our truths before creating a monster!
The
rustc_codegen_llvmandrustc_codegen_ssacrates are fairly critical for rustc's correctness. Small mistakes here can easily result in undefined behavior, since a "small mistake" can mean something like "link and execute the wrong code". We should probably run any and all asserts in these modules unconditionally on whether this is a "debug build", and damn the costs in performance....Especially because the costs in performance seem to be nothing. It is not clear how much correctness we gain here, but I'll take free correctness improvements.
r? @ghost