-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13k
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
Clean create_substs_for_generic_args #80827
Conversation
r? @varkor (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
636c868
to
48fc877
Compare
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
48fc877
to
2d04f2c
Compare
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
ae60adb
to
cb125e5
Compare
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
cb125e5
to
d26943d
Compare
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
d26943d
to
3e0a9db
Compare
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
298ac11
to
ffde65c
Compare
ffde65c
to
c780fe4
Compare
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion. |
⌛ Trying commit c780fe4 with merge a767935a5a42bfdac439f8d8fbec1ecdcdf8dcfb... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Queued a767935a5a42bfdac439f8d8fbec1ecdcdf8dcfb with parent c87ef0a, future comparison URL. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
Finished benchmarking try commit (a767935a5a42bfdac439f8d8fbec1ecdcdf8dcfb): comparison url. Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up. @bors rollup=never |
Well, that's disappointing. I'm a bit unsure if there's anything additional I can do from here, since I can't really see what introduced the regression other than the force_infer_lt, and the memory taken by local variables should be the same or less than before. If anyone has any better ideas, I can try implementing them, but barring that I'll probably just close this PR. |
Moves large error case to separate function, and recompute
force_infer_lt
when that case is hit rather than keeping track of it through all loops.Hopefully this fixes the perf regression caused from an earlier PR.