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

Rollup of 7 pull requests #84757

Closed
wants to merge 18 commits into from

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

mark-i-m and others added 18 commits April 27, 2021 21:20
Split into five sections to match the tiers: "Tier 1 with Host Tools",
"Tier 1", "Tier 2 with Host Tools", "Tier 2", and "Tier 3". Explain each
tier briefly in prose, and link to the corresponding section of the
policy for full requirements.

Drop the `host` columns from the first four, since the different
sections distinguish that. (Keep the `host` column for "Tier 3", since
it's a single list and the `host` column just indicates if host tools
are expected to work.)

Targets with host tools always have full support for std, so drop the
`std` column from those.

Move the explanations of the `std` column next to the appropriate
tables, and drop the unknown/WIP case for tier 2 targets.

Use "target" terminology consistently throughout.

Sort each table by target name.
On arm64 we have seen on several databases that ISB (instruction synchronization
barrier) is better to use than yield in a spin loop.  The yield instruction is a
nop.  The isb instruction puts the processor to sleep for some short time.  isb
is a good equivalent to the pause instruction on x86.

Below is an experiment that shows the effects of yield and isb on Arm64 and the
time of a pause instruction on x86 Intel processors.  The micro-benchmarks use
https://github.com/google/benchmark.git

$ cat a.cc
static void BM_scalar_increment(benchmark::State& state) {
  int i = 0;
  for (auto _ : state)
    benchmark::DoNotOptimize(i++);
}
BENCHMARK(BM_scalar_increment);
static void BM_yield(benchmark::State& state) {
  for (auto _ : state)
    asm volatile("yield"::);
}
BENCHMARK(BM_yield);
static void BM_isb(benchmark::State& state) {
  for (auto _ : state)
    asm volatile("isb"::);
}
BENCHMARK(BM_isb);
BENCHMARK_MAIN();

$ g++ -o run a.cc -O2 -lbenchmark -lpthread
$ ./run

--------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                    Time             CPU   Iterations
--------------------------------------------------------------

AWS Graviton2 (Neoverse-N1) processor:
BM_scalar_increment      0.485 ns        0.485 ns   1000000000
BM_yield                 0.400 ns        0.400 ns   1000000000
BM_isb                    13.2 ns         13.2 ns     52993304

AWS Graviton (A-72) processor:
BM_scalar_increment      0.897 ns        0.874 ns    801558633
BM_yield                 0.877 ns        0.875 ns    800002377
BM_isb                    13.0 ns         12.7 ns     55169412

Apple Arm64 M1 processor:
BM_scalar_increment      0.315 ns        0.315 ns   1000000000
BM_yield                 0.313 ns        0.313 ns   1000000000
BM_isb                    9.06 ns         9.06 ns     77259282

static void BM_pause(benchmark::State& state) {
  for (auto _ : state)
    asm volatile("pause"::);
}
BENCHMARK(BM_pause);

Intel Skylake processor:
BM_scalar_increment      0.295 ns        0.295 ns   1000000000
BM_pause                  41.7 ns         41.7 ns     16780553

Tested on Graviton2 aarch64-linux with `./x.py test`.
…xtern_locations, r=jyn514

rustdoc: Only store locations in Cache::extern_locations and calculate the other info on-demand

 help rust-lang#84588
…t-tier-policy, r=pietroalbini

platform-support.md: Update for consistency with Target Tier Policy

Split into five sections to match the tiers: "Tier 1 with Host Tools",
"Tier 1", "Tier 2 with Host Tools", "Tier 2", and "Tier 3". Explain each
tier briefly in prose, and link to the corresponding section of the
policy for full requirements.

Drop the `host` columns from the first four, since the different
sections distinguish that. (Keep the `host` column for "Tier 3", since
it's a single list and the `host` column just indicates if host tools
are expected to work.)

Targets with host tools always have full support for std, so drop the
`std` column from those.

Move the explanations of the `std` column next to the appropriate
tables, and drop the unknown/WIP case for tier 2 targets.

Use "target" terminology consistently throughout.

Sort each table by target name.
[Arm64] use isb instruction instead of yield in spin loops

On arm64 we have seen on several databases that ISB (instruction synchronization
barrier) is better to use than yield in a spin loop.  The yield instruction is a
nop.  The isb instruction puts the processor to sleep for some short time.  isb
is a good equivalent to the pause instruction on x86.

Below is an experiment that shows the effects of yield and isb on Arm64 and the
time of a pause instruction on x86 Intel processors.  The micro-benchmarks use
https://github.com/google/benchmark.git

```
$ cat a.cc
static void BM_scalar_increment(benchmark::State& state) {
  int i = 0;
  for (auto _ : state)
    benchmark::DoNotOptimize(i++);
}
BENCHMARK(BM_scalar_increment);
static void BM_yield(benchmark::State& state) {
  for (auto _ : state)
    asm volatile("yield"::);
}
BENCHMARK(BM_yield);
static void BM_isb(benchmark::State& state) {
  for (auto _ : state)
    asm volatile("isb"::);
}
BENCHMARK(BM_isb);
BENCHMARK_MAIN();

$ g++ -o run a.cc -O2 -lbenchmark -lpthread
$ ./run

--------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                    Time             CPU   Iterations
--------------------------------------------------------------

AWS Graviton2 (Neoverse-N1) processor:
BM_scalar_increment      0.485 ns        0.485 ns   1000000000
BM_yield                 0.400 ns        0.400 ns   1000000000
BM_isb                    13.2 ns         13.2 ns     52993304

AWS Graviton (A-72) processor:
BM_scalar_increment      0.897 ns        0.874 ns    801558633
BM_yield                 0.877 ns        0.875 ns    800002377
BM_isb                    13.0 ns         12.7 ns     55169412

Apple Arm64 M1 processor:
BM_scalar_increment      0.315 ns        0.315 ns   1000000000
BM_yield                 0.313 ns        0.313 ns   1000000000
BM_isb                    9.06 ns         9.06 ns     77259282
```

```
static void BM_pause(benchmark::State& state) {
  for (auto _ : state)
    asm volatile("pause"::);
}
BENCHMARK(BM_pause);

Intel Skylake processor:
BM_scalar_increment      0.295 ns        0.295 ns   1000000000
BM_pause                  41.7 ns         41.7 ns     16780553
```

Tested on Graviton2 aarch64-linux with `./x.py test`.
Reset the docs' copy path button after 1 second

I like that this copy path button on the top next to the type/module's name changes to a check mark when you successfully clicked and copied the path but I find it really weird how the icon stays that check mark forever after the first time of clicking it. Imagine you leave that documentation tab open and come back after 2 hours and you still see that check mark in that box because you copied the path 2 hours ago. You will probably be confused and you might've forgotten what that button even does (even more so currently where this is a new feature, or when you simply don't use it often), so I really think at some point it should go back to the ⎘ icon which, at least to me, pretty clearly indicates copying, whereas the check mark (if it stays there for so long) could falsely look like a verification mark indicating "this module is verified" or something like that.
I believe after a longer period of time it's not logical to still tell the user "yes you've copied this successful".

In addition to this timeout, maybe it could be made so that you can't copy again until this cooldown of 1 second is over, but I'm not sure how useful or user-friendly that feature would be so maybe it's fine the way it is now.
Also the timeout is cleared every time you click again so if you constantly click it, it won't reset during that.
…aumeGomez

Add a ToC to the Target Tier Policy documentation

The policy document is quite lengthy, I figured it might be good to have a quick way to jump to the specific tier policies.
@rustbot rustbot added the rollup A PR which is a rollup label Apr 30, 2021
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

@bors: r+ p=7 rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 30, 2021

📌 Commit 4511013 has been approved by GuillaumeGomez

@bors bors added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Apr 30, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 30, 2021

⌛ Testing commit 4511013 with merge c44df0d80b64a7e06cce55257bdeba552fd02c37...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 30, 2021

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

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

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Apr 30, 2021
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

I don't have access to the failure logs apparently. Does someone from the @rust-lang/infra have access to it? Closing the rollup PR in the meantime.

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez deleted the rollup-tkw84zs branch April 30, 2021 20:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants