Only compute captures once when building MIR.

[cjgillot]

No description provided.

[rust-highfive]

r? @wesleywiser

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

[wesleywiser]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 389c604 with merge 4d582583c789fc5ed878cf5fbd2ccc49a85f9a71...

[wesleywiser]

Great work! The simplification of to_upvars_resolved_place_builder is really nice 🎉

r=me when perf comes back

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 4d582583c789fc5ed878cf5fbd2ccc49a85f9a71 (4d582583c789fc5ed878cf5fbd2ccc49a85f9a71)

[rust-timer]

Queued 4d582583c789fc5ed878cf5fbd2ccc49a85f9a71 with parent 98f3001, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (4d582583c789fc5ed878cf5fbd2ccc49a85f9a71): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

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

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.3%	[1.2%, 1.4%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.5%	[3.1%, 4.0%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.3%	[1.2%, 1.4%]	2

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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.3%	[1.3%, 1.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.5%	[-1.9%, -1.0%]	4
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.9%	[-3.0%, -1.0%]	16
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.5%	[-1.9%, -1.0%]	4

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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.4%	[3.4%, 3.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Footnotes

1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩² ↩³

2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩² ↩³

[cjgillot]

keccak and cranelift-codegen have been noisy lately.
@bors r=wesleywiser

[bors]

📌 Commit bcbd183 has been approved by wesleywiser

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit bcbd183 with merge 2e44c17...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: wesleywiser
Pushing 2e44c17 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (2e44c17): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - ACTION NEEDED

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.2%	[1.1%, 1.3%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.4%	[3.1%, 3.9%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[1.1%, 1.3%]	2

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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.6%	[0.6%, 0.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.1%	[-1.1%, -1.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Footnotes

1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩² ↩³

2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩² ↩³

[nnethercote]

Yep, noise.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged