Allow more top-down inlining for single-BB callees #138157
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
r? @Noratrieb rustbot has assigned @Noratrieb. Use |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-perf
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 7, 2025
…<try> Allow more top-down inlining for single-BB callees This means that things like `<usize as Step>::forward_unchecked` and `<PartialOrd for f32>::le` will inline even if we've already done a bunch of inlining to find the calls to them. Fixes rust-lang#138136 Draft as it's built atop rust-lang#138135, which adds a mir-opt test that's a nice demonstration of this.
scottmcm
commented
Mar 7, 2025
| } | ||
|
|
||
| bb5: { | ||
| _8 = AddUnchecked(copy _7, const 1_u32); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Huzzah, a Range loop is finally optimized down to just the AddUnchecked(i, 1), no Step trait indirection.
cc @FractalFir who will probably appreciate this for other backends.
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (10923a0): 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 -0.6%, secondary -0.3%)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.
CyclesResults (primary -1.2%)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 0.1%, secondary 0.1%)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: 766.551s -> 766.742s (0.02%) |
rustbot
added
perf-regression
scottmcm
force-pushed
the
inline-more-tiny-things
branch
from
48f63e3 to
e6789c8
Compare
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-perf
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 8, 2025
…<try> Allow more top-down inlining for single-BB callees This means that things like `<usize as Step>::forward_unchecked` and `<PartialOrd for f32>::le` will inline even if we've already done a bunch of inlining to find the calls to them. Fixes rust-lang#138136 ~~Draft as it's built atop rust-lang#138135, which adds a mir-opt test that's a nice demonstration of this. To see just this change, look at <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138157/commits/48f63e3be552605c2933056b77bf23a326757f92>~~ Rebased to be just the inlining change, as the other existing tests show it great.
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (3827dac): 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 -2.5%, secondary -3.0%)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 -1.2%, secondary -0.3%)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 0.1%, secondary 0.1%)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: 766.525s -> 765.262s (-0.16%) |
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-perf
scottmcm
force-pushed
the
inline-more-tiny-things
branch
from
e6789c8 to
154f715
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
scottmcm
force-pushed
the
inline-more-tiny-things
branch
from
154f715 to
d30af47
Compare
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
This means that things like `<usize as Step>::forward_unchecked` and `<PartialOrd for f32>::le` will inline even if we've already done a bunch of inlining to find the calls to them.
scottmcm
force-pushed
the
inline-more-tiny-things
branch
from
d30af47 to
91af4aa
Compare
|
Oh, apparently x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu gets an extra function attribute despite the test being @bors r=oli-obk |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2025
…oli-obk Allow more top-down inlining for single-BB callees This means that things like `<usize as Step>::forward_unchecked` and `<PartialOrd for f32>::le` will inline even if we've already done a bunch of inlining to find the calls to them. Fixes rust-lang#138136 ~~Draft as it's built atop rust-lang#138135, which adds a mir-opt test that's a nice demonstration of this. To see just this change, look at <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138157/commits/48f63e3be552605c2933056b77bf23a326757f92>~~ Rebased to be just the inlining change, as the other existing tests show it great.
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
@bors retry (x86_64-pc-windows-gnu transient Windows filesystem access issue) |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
|
Post-merge analysis result Test differences
(and 10 additional diffs) |
1 task
|
Finished benchmarking commit (523c507): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text belowOur benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR. Next Steps:
@rustbot label: +perf-regression 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 2.9%)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 -0.9%, secondary 1.8%)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 0.0%, secondary -0.3%)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.
Bootstrap: 774.074s -> 772.321s (-0.23%) |
|
That serde icount regression looks like noise; it went back down again in #138480 (comment) |
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
to model-checking/verify-rust-std
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2025
…oli-obk Allow more top-down inlining for single-BB callees This means that things like `<usize as Step>::forward_unchecked` and `<PartialOrd for f32>::le` will inline even if we've already done a bunch of inlining to find the calls to them. Fixes rust-lang#138136 ~~Draft as it's built atop rust-lang#138135, which adds a mir-opt test that's a nice demonstration of this. To see just this change, look at <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138157/commits/48f63e3be552605c2933056b77bf23a326757f92>~~ Rebased to be just the inlining change, as the other existing tests show it great.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This means that things like
<usize as Step>::forward_uncheckedand<PartialOrd for f32>::lewill inline even ifwe've already done a bunch of inlining to find the calls to them.
Fixes #138136
Draft as it's built atop #138135, which adds a mir-opt test that's a nice demonstration of this. To see just this change, look at 48f63e3Rebased to be just the inlining change, as the other existing tests show it great.