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 9 pull requests #120112

Merged
merged 22 commits into from
Jan 19, 2024
Merged

Rollup of 9 pull requests #120112

merged 22 commits into from
Jan 19, 2024

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

arlosi and others added 22 commits January 4, 2024 11:40
Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>
…esleywiser

bootstrap: handle vendored sources when remapping crate paths

rust-lang#115872 introduced a feature to add path remapping for crate dependencies, but only when they came from Cargo's registry cache, not a vendor directory.

This caused builds that used remapped debuginfo and vendor directories to fail with:
```
std::fs::read_dir(registry_src) failed with No such file or directory (os error 2)
```
or (if the `registry/src` directory exists but is empty)
```
error: --remap-path-prefix must contain '=' between FROM and TO
```

Fixes rust-lang#117885 by explicitly supporting the `vendor` directory and adding it to `RUSTC_CARGO_REGISTRY_SRC_TO_REMAP`.

Note that `bootstrap.py` already assumes that `./vendor` within the rust repo is the only supported vendoring location.

r? `@pietroalbini`
…_improved_attr, r=petrochenkov

Improved collapse_debuginfo attribute, added command-line flag

Improved attribute collapse_debuginfo with variants: `#[collapse_debuginfo=(no|external|yes)]`.
Added command-line flag for default behaviour.
Work-in-progress: will add more tests.

cc rust-lang#100758
…sper

replace `track_errors` usages with bubbling up `ErrorGuaranteed`

more of the same as rust-lang#117449 (removing `track_errors`)
…ar-helper, r=lcnr

Remove `next_root_ty_var`

Uhh we seem to not have any test that relies on this anymore. Maybe due to the way we changed alias-relate or whatever.

Removing this hack helper fn because rust-lang#119106 is the general solution.

r? lcnr
…ikic

tests/ui/asm/inline-syntax: adapt for LLVM 18

Fixes rust-lang#119120.
…Lapkin

change `.unwrap()` to `?` on write where `fmt::Result` is returned

Fixes rust-lang#120090 which points out that some of the `.unwrap()`s in `rustc_middle/src/mir/pretty.rs` are likely meant to be `?`s
Fix typo in munmap_partial.rs

addres -> address
@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Jan 18, 2024
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=9

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 18, 2024

📌 Commit 9c6795b has been approved by matthiaskrgr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jan 18, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 19, 2024

💥 Test timed out

@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 Jan 19, 2024
@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)

@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors retry

@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 Jan 19, 2024
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors p=11

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 19, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 9c6795b with merge 92d7277...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 19, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing 92d7277 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jan 19, 2024
@bors bors merged commit 92d7277 into rust-lang:master Jan 19, 2024
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.77.0 milestone Jan 19, 2024
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Message Perf Build Sha
#119582 bootstrap: handle vendored sources when remapping crate pat… ad29c6e7f22b20b592b395f4c63b47488a0c155a (link)
#119730 docs: fix typos d3c9d4a75ed12469cbf231bc46ad98536ab3fcd2 (link)
#119828 Improved collapse_debuginfo attribute, added command-line f… 907a101ca9348c8bce7194043f9191ae7e8595e4 (link)
#119869 replace track_errors usages with bubbling up `ErrorGuaran… 9e918d1b993e92996112a470e2e2d57de215f1f6 (link)
#120037 Remove next_root_ty_var d62113ddf8b52917059346f0d11c3b2e6880437b (link)
#120094 tests/ui/asm/inline-syntax: adapt for LLVM 18 c8ad055df821195e9c27d332c2474810564ccc47 (link)
#120096 Set RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=1 consistently 9d86ac231a9f3f0a2818f6de3f3d3d79ee4f27b3 (link)
#120101 change .unwrap() to ? on write where fmt::Result is r… e912234e3098304a83935866639211ec8f5673d9 (link)
#120102 Fix typo in munmap_partial.rs 97148109e2a51307316aa97f36f9b5526baf0e3f (link)

previous master: 16fadb3f25

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (92d7277): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.2% [0.3%, 4.1%] 7
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.7% [-0.7%, -0.7%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.7% [-0.7%, -0.7%] 1

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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-4.6% [-4.6%, -4.6%] 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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.7% [2.2%, 4.4%] 10
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 663.017s -> 665.984s (0.45%)
Artifact size: 308.29 MiB -> 308.33 MiB (0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Jan 19, 2024
@Kobzol
Copy link
Contributor

Kobzol commented Jan 19, 2024

Type checking seems to have regressed. Maybe #119869 or #120037? Let's see.

@rust-timer build 9e918d1

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (9e918d1): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
4.5% [4.5%, 4.5%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-4.7% [-4.7%, -4.7%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.7% [0.7%, 0.7%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.7% [0.7%, 0.7%] 1

Bootstrap: 663.017s -> 663.908s (0.13%)
Artifact size: 308.29 MiB -> 308.28 MiB (-0.00%)

@Kobzol
Copy link
Contributor

Kobzol commented Jan 19, 2024

No, that was not it.

@rust-timer build d62113d

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (d62113d): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - ACTION NEEDED

Instruction count

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.6% [3.3%, 4.0%] 6
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
4.4% [4.4%, 4.4%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.7% [-2.7%, -2.7%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-5.0% [-5.0%, -5.0%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) -2.7% [-2.7%, -2.7%] 1

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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.5% [3.2%, 3.9%] 6
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 663.017s -> 665.959s (0.44%)
Artifact size: 308.29 MiB -> 308.26 MiB (-0.01%)

@Kobzol
Copy link
Contributor

Kobzol commented Jan 19, 2024

That seems to be it. @compiler-errors was the regression expected?

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

compiler-errors commented Jan 19, 2024

No, but looking back at the rollup (for the PR #112399) that added the helper function that I removed, it seems to have just undone the perf win here:

#112702 (comment)

So I think we can just ignore this perf regression.

@Kobzol
Copy link
Contributor

Kobzol commented Jan 19, 2024

Ok.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Jan 19, 2024
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the rollup-48o3919 branch March 16, 2024 18:18
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. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.