Make the inliner recursion depth hack stronger#147062
Make the inliner recursion depth hack stronger#147062saethlin wants to merge 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
Conversation
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
…try> Make the inliner recursion depth hack stronger
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (84baca6): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text belowBenchmarking 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. Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @bors rollup=never Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -3.5%, secondary 3.9%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesResults (primary -4.2%, secondary -4.8%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeResults (primary 0.2%, secondary 0.0%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Bootstrap: 478.827s -> 470.051s (-1.83%) |
|
(the cycle changes and bootstrap time are noise returning to normal). |
049731c to
9e379ff
Compare
|
Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt This PR changes a file inside |
|
rustbot has assigned @petrochenkov. Use |
4 wasn't enough to fix the crash? :D |
|
@bors r+ |
…etrochenkov Make the inliner recursion depth hack stronger We previously tried to introduce a more gentle version of this hack in github.com//pull/129714, but that wasn't enough because the problem was re-reported in #131960 (comment). So this increases the magic number from 2 to 8. Surely nobody will complain that they have a type whose depth grows more than 8 times faster than its call graph depth.
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)For more information how to resolve CI failures of this job, visit this link. |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
|
That is hilarious |
We previously tried to introduce a more gentle version of this hack in github.com//pull/129714, but that wasn't enough because the problem was re-reported in #131960 (comment). So this increases the magic number from 2 to 8. Surely nobody will complain that they have a type whose depth grows more than 8 times faster than its call graph depth.