Repository navigation
Conversation
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Parallelize AST -> HIR lowering
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (79a91eb): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read:Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf. Next, please: If you can, justify the regressions found in this try perf run in writing along with @bors rollup=never rustc-perf Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 1.2%, secondary 0.4%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesResults (primary 11.0%, secondary 2.7%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeResults (primary -0.1%, secondary -0.3%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Bootstrap: 489.575s -> 491.192s (0.33%) |
|
Pretty nice results! |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Parallelization of AST -> HIR lowering broke deterministic encoding of syntax contexts 🤣 (#161450). |
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Parallelize AST -> HIR lowering
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (335f660): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read:Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf. Next, please: If you can, justify the regressions found in this try perf run in writing along with @bors rollup=never rustc-perf Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -3.1%, secondary -2.7%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesResults (primary 14.6%, secondary -2.7%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeResults (primary -0.0%, secondary -0.1%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Bootstrap: 489.84s -> 488.516s (-0.27%) |
…joshtriplett Remove `NonOwner` variant from `AstOwner` The refactoring extracted from rust-lang#163495 that should be responsible for memory improvements. And seems logical that enum `AstOwner` should not contain variant `NonOwner`. r? @petrochenkov
…joshtriplett Remove `NonOwner` variant from `AstOwner` The refactoring extracted from rust-lang#163495 that should be responsible for memory improvements. And seems logical that enum `AstOwner` should not contain variant `NonOwner`. r? @petrochenkov
…joshtriplett Remove `NonOwner` variant from `AstOwner` The refactoring extracted from rust-lang#163495 that should be responsible for memory improvements. And seems logical that enum `AstOwner` should not contain variant `NonOwner`. r? @petrochenkov
Rollup merge of #163887 - aerooneqq:remove-ast-non-owner, r=joshtriplett Remove `NonOwner` variant from `AstOwner` The refactoring extracted from #163495 that should be responsible for memory improvements. And seems logical that enum `AstOwner` should not contain variant `NonOwner`. r? @petrochenkov
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bb4a6b3 to
25fca6d
Compare
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
View all comments
Draft for perf and CI.
r? @petrochenkov