don't use commit_if_ok during higher_ranked_sub

[lcnr]

This snapshot doesn't really do anything useful for us, especially once we deal with placeholder outlive bounds during trait solving.

I guess that currently the idea is that higher_ranked_sub could cause a later leak_check to fail even if the combine operation isn't actually relevant. But really, using combine outside of snapshot and ignoring its result is wrong anyways, as it can constrain inference variables.

r? rust-lang/types

[lcnr]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit aea2d7e with merge 4b8bf8e9ee93161da0e9b6d7a7f5c6e89e97f612...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 4b8bf8e9ee93161da0e9b6d7a7f5c6e89e97f612 (4b8bf8e9ee93161da0e9b6d7a7f5c6e89e97f612)

[rust-timer]

Queued 4b8bf8e9ee93161da0e9b6d7a7f5c6e89e97f612 with parent 1dcff2d, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (4b8bf8e9ee93161da0e9b6d7a7f5c6e89e97f612): comparison url.

Instruction count

• Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found
• Secondary benchmarks: mixed results

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	1.7%	2.4%	8
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-0.7%	-0.8%	7
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	-0.9%	-1.4%	7
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-0.7%	-0.8%	7

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

• Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvement found
• Secondary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-0.2%	-0.2%	1
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	-2.2%	-3.0%	3
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-0.2%	-0.2%	1

Cycles

Results

• Primary benchmarks: mixed results
• Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regressions found

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	2.1%	2.1%	1
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	3.2%	4.6%	9
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-2.8%	-3.6%	2
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-1.2%	-3.6%	3

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 may lead to changes in compiler perf.

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

Footnotes

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

2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩² ↩³

[lcnr]

the changes in tt-muncher seem unrelated/weird, considering that this test is pretty much only for macros. Assume that we can just ignore that one 😁

maybe some inlining/function positioning changes?

[oli-obk]

the changes in tt-muncher seem unrelated/weird,

Yea, I've seen that one randomly improve/regress across unrelated PRs in the last day or so

[oli-obk]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit aea2d7e has been approved by oli-obk

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit aea2d7e with merge 6dba4ed...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing 6dba4ed to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (6dba4ed): comparison url.

Instruction count

• Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found
• Secondary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-0.7%	-0.7%	7
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	-0.8%	-0.9%	6
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-0.7%	-0.7%	7

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

• Primary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regression found
• Secondary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvement found

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	4.6%	4.6%	1
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	-2.6%	-2.6%	1
All 😿🎉 (primary)	4.6%	4.6%	1

Cycles

Results

• Primary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regression found
• Secondary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	2.9%	2.9%	1
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	-3.0%	-4.0%	3
All 😿🎉 (primary)	2.9%	2.9%	1

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

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Footnotes

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

2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩² ↩³