-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.4k
[PERF] partition shims into CGU of their characteristic types, if possible #141560
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
[PERF] partition shims into CGU of their characteristic types, if possible #141560
Conversation
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
…try> [PERF] partition shims into CGU of their characteristic types, if possible We throw all non-`InstanceKind::Item` mono items into the same fallback CGU. What happens to incremental codegen if we didn't do that, but tried a bit harder to partition shims into the same CGU as their characteristic types? r? `@ghost`
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
8ce6e6e
to
3695a33
Compare
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
…try> [PERF] partition shims into CGU of their characteristic types, if possible We throw all non-`InstanceKind::Item` mono items into the same fallback CGU. This seems to have been a thing since #32779. This PR investigates: what happens to incremental codegen if we didn't do that, but tried a bit harder to partition shims into the same CGU as their characteristic types? r? `@ghost`
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Finished benchmarking commit (155e6b9): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text belowBenchmarking 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 @bors rollup=never Instruction countThis is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 0.4%, secondary -0.7%)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.
CyclesResults (primary 6.6%, secondary 5.3%)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.
Binary sizeResults (primary 0.4%, secondary 0.5%)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.
Bootstrap: 775.708s -> 776.167s (0.06%) |
We throw all non-
InstanceKind::Item
mono items into the same fallback CGU. This seems to have been a thing since #32779. This PR investigates: what happens to incremental codegen if we didn't do that, but tried a bit harder to partition shims into the same CGU as their characteristic types?r? @ghost