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

#[inline] slice::Iter::advance_by #87736

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 4, 2021
Merged

Conversation

the8472
Copy link
Member

@the8472 the8472 commented Aug 3, 2021

#87387 (comment) was marked as a regression. One of the methods in the PR was missing an inline annotation unlike all the other methods on slice iterators.

Let's see if that makes a difference.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Aug 3, 2021
@the8472
Copy link
Member Author

the8472 commented Aug 3, 2021

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Aug 3, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 3, 2021

⌛ Trying commit e44d39a with merge 6043f941ffb62a53c52d08953a2d8b19441696e0...

@the8472 the8472 added the T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Aug 3, 2021
@the8472 the8472 changed the title #[inline] slice::advance_by #[inline] slice::Iter::advance_by Aug 3, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 3, 2021

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 6043f941ffb62a53c52d08953a2d8b19441696e0 (6043f941ffb62a53c52d08953a2d8b19441696e0)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued 6043f941ffb62a53c52d08953a2d8b19441696e0 with parent d5fd37f, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking try commit (6043f941ffb62a53c52d08953a2d8b19441696e0): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to significant improvements 🎉 in compiler performance.

  • Moderate improvement in instruction counts (up to -1.6% on full builds of regex-opt)

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

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 led to changes in compiler perf.

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

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Aug 3, 2021
@the8472
Copy link
Member Author

the8472 commented Aug 4, 2021

That recovers the regex-opt regression

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 4, 2021

📌 Commit e44d39a has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 4, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 4, 2021

⌛ Testing commit e44d39a with merge 6fe0886...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 4, 2021

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing 6fe0886 to master...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs Relevant to the library 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