-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.9k
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
move considering_regions
to the infcx
#99501
Conversation
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
⌛ Trying commit 021d922c81dc22e07a430b98f8673cbc004e56d1 with merge da971220f376e3ce460c76dbd7febd3c9890dfda... |
Some changes occurred in diagnostic error codes |
@bors try |
⌛ Trying commit 5390cbb23bc12626d369d1ac0a01580fe363a9d4 with merge 23f3bd4a887f76dfd3000c00074dd2eed34613df... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Queued 23f3bd4a887f76dfd3000c00074dd2eed34613df with parent 03d488b, future comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking commit (23f3bd4a887f76dfd3000c00074dd2eed34613df): comparison url. Instruction count
Max RSS (memory usage)Results
CyclesResults
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 Footnotes |
Hmm... can't get the details of this perf regression:
|
Maybe some temporary network/server issue ? rustup-toolchain-master successfully downloads 03d488b here. |
aha! |
|
let's try rebasing and running perf again, this diff looks really weird |
5390cbb
to
43ccacf
Compare
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
⌛ Trying commit 43ccacf with merge 019e66e07b3107d621817372a70d171d66dfb9ba... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Queued 019e66e07b3107d621817372a70d171d66dfb9ba with parent ceeb5ad, future comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking commit (019e66e07b3107d621817372a70d171d66dfb9ba): comparison url. Instruction count
Max RSS (memory usage)Results
CyclesResults
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 Footnotes |
@bors r+ the perf part seems like just some changes in how LLVM optimizes some memcpy |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Finished benchmarking commit (62b272d): comparison url. Instruction count
Max RSS (memory usage)Results
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression Footnotes |
@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. |
it seems weird to prove some obligations which constrain inference vars while ignoring regions in a context which considers regions. This is especially weird because even for a fulfillment context with ignored regions, we still added region outlives bounds when directly relating regions.
tbh our handling of regions is still very weird, but at least this is a step in the right direction imo.
r? rust-lang/types