Only unpack span data once to compute end_point and next_point.

[cjgillot]

Split from #144930

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 581d76c (581d76c4b6a32da903c3b2fab124fe5418b0b7de, parent: 2e2642e641a941f0a1400c7827fd89aa86fef8f4)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (581d76c): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

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

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-1.7%, -0.2%]	15
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.4%	[-0.6%, -0.1%]	18
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-1.7%, -0.2%]	15

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.2%, secondary -2.6%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.2%	[1.2%, 1.2%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.6%	[-2.9%, -2.4%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[1.2%, 1.2%]	1

Cycles

Results (secondary -0.5%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	5.4%	[5.4%, 5.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.5%	[-2.5%, -2.4%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 470.222s -> 469.978s (-0.05%)
Artifact size: 377.51 MiB -> 377.49 MiB (-0.01%)

[cjgillot]

r? compiler

[lqd]

Great.

r=me when green

[cjgillot]

@bors r=lqd

[bors]

📌 Commit 1460cfe has been approved by lqd

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[samueltardieu]

I can't seem to create rollups right now, so prefer this rollup=never over the next rollup=iffy that would run alone.

@bors p=1

[jhpratt]

prioritizing ahead of rollup

@bors p=6

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 1460cfe with merge 6545b05...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: lqd
Pushing 6545b05 to master...

[github-actions]

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 46c219b (parent) -> 6545b05 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 2 test diffs

2 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 6545b056388a727c2ac4a4e70fb01d60a11398b1 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

1. pr-check-1: 1371.8s -> 1726.9s (25.9%)
2. dist-x86_64-apple: 6391.6s -> 7615.1s (19.1%)
3. dist-aarch64-apple: 7390.2s -> 6212.9s (-15.9%)
4. x86_64-gnu-llvm-19: 2498.5s -> 2879.7s (15.3%)
5. i686-gnu-nopt-1: 7315.3s -> 8377.6s (14.5%)
6. x86_64-gnu-tools: 3377.7s -> 3808.4s (12.8%)
7. i686-gnu-1: 7538.9s -> 8453.5s (12.1%)
8. aarch64-apple: 5755.5s -> 6449.0s (12.0%)
9. i686-gnu-2: 5537.3s -> 6167.7s (11.4%)
10. dist-apple-various: 4373.0s -> 4854.6s (11.0%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (6545b05): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Our benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR.
This might be an actual regression, but it can also be just noise.

Next Steps:

• If the regression was expected or you think it can be justified,
  please write a comment with sufficient written justification, and add
  @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged to it, to mark the regression as triaged.
• If you think that you know of a way to resolve the regression, try to create
  a new PR with a fix for the regression.
• If you do not understand the regression or you think that it is just noise,
  you can ask the @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance working group for help (members of this group
  were already notified of this PR).

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.7%	[0.4%, 0.8%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.2%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-0.6%, -0.4%]	9
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.2%]	2

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -2.3%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.3%	[-2.5%, -2.0%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results (secondary 12.7%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	12.7%	[12.7%, 12.7%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 465.73s -> 467.563s (0.39%)
Artifact size: 378.26 MiB -> 378.27 MiB (0.00%)

[panstromek]

perf triage:

tt-muncher regression is noise (bimodality, returning back to previous state)

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged