Skip to content

Conversation

@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor

@jdonszelmann jdonszelmann commented Nov 29, 2025

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Nov 29, 2025

These commits modify compiler targets.
(See the Target Tier Policy.)

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Nov 29, 2025
@rustbot

This comment has been minimized.

@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2025
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Nov 29, 2025
@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

cc: @oli-obk this is what I was talking about. not yet clean, but wanted to see what perf looked like :3

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Nov 29, 2025

💔 Test for 694a8a4 failed: CI. Failed jobs:

@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors try

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2025
@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Nov 29, 2025

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 7ac6e1b (7ac6e1b480efa4bd33f86547b8e73a2122f069d0, parent: 8a3a6bdb68b4d4c9ed922840808b02015741331e)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (7ac6e1b): 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)
-0.2% [-0.4%, -0.2%] 8
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.4% [-1.4%, -0.1%] 32
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.2% [-0.4%, -0.2%] 8

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 471.041s -> 471.157s (0.02%)
Artifact size: 386.90 MiB -> 386.90 MiB (0.00%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Nov 29, 2025
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Nov 30, 2025

The large workspace benchmark shows improvements in not just instructions, but also time on the write dep info query.

Everything else is a mixed bag on time, unsure why other queries are affected. There are minimal improvements for incremental loading across the board. I'm guessing I'm general the branch predictor just got this all correct.

@jdonszelmann jdonszelmann force-pushed the metadata-decoding-s branch 2 times, most recently from 524ba79 to 285c9b1 Compare December 1, 2025 11:26
fn decoder(self, pos: usize) -> Self::Context;
}

impl<'a> Metadata<'a> for &'a MetadataBlob {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

importantly there are now only two, not 5 implementations of Metadata.

  • One for MetadataBlob which provides only the BlobDecodeContext which only implements BlobDecoder
  • One for (tcx, cdata) which provides the MetadataDecodeContext which does implement SpanDecoder and TyDecoder.

This makes it statically known whether we have tcx and cdata available, and whether spans etc can be decoded or not.

fn decode<'a, 'tcx, M: Metadata<'a>>(self, metadata: M) -> T::Value<'tcx>
where
T::Value<'tcx>: Decodable<DecodeContext<'a, 'tcx>>,
T::Value<'tcx>: Decodable<M::Context>,
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Decodable specifically with the Context type from whichever kind of M: Metadata is given.

impl<'a, 'tcx> MetadataDecodeContext<'a, 'tcx> {
#[inline]
fn tcx(&self) -> TyCtxt<'tcx> {
let Some(tcx) = self.tcx else {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

unwrap removed

if let Some(alloc_decoding_session) = self.alloc_decoding_session {
alloc_decoding_session.decode_alloc_id(self)
} else {
bug!("Attempting to decode interpret::AllocId without CrateMetadata")
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

unwrap removed

let cdata = self.cdata();

let Some(sess) = self.sess else {
bug!(
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

unwrap removed

@jdonszelmann jdonszelmann changed the title Metadata decoding s Remove unwraps from metadata decoding: introduce BlobDecoder Dec 1, 2025
Copy link
Member

@WaffleLapkin WaffleLapkin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Dec 7, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Dec 7, 2025

Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use @rustbot ready.

@WaffleLapkin WaffleLapkin self-assigned this Dec 7, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Dec 7, 2025

This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

@WaffleLapkin
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Dec 8, 2025

📌 Commit 8c7889b has been approved by WaffleLapkin

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Dec 8, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Dec 8, 2025

⌛ Testing commit 8c7889b with merge 5bc3450...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Dec 8, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: WaffleLapkin
Pushing 5bc3450 to main...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 8, 2025
@bors bors merged commit 5bc3450 into rust-lang:main Dec 8, 2025
12 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.94.0 milestone Dec 8, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 8, 2025

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 03d7ad7 (parent) -> 5bc3450 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 3 test diffs

3 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 5bc345055b06dc096b01bc6d1e0cbe92d3cc630e --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: 1729.2s -> 2048.0s (+18.4%)
  2. aarch64-gnu-llvm-20-2: 2206.2s -> 2579.0s (+16.9%)
  3. dist-x86_64-apple: 8083.0s -> 6830.5s (-15.5%)
  4. x86_64-msvc-ext3: 5758.6s -> 6570.2s (+14.1%)
  5. x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-1: 3115.3s -> 3554.0s (+14.1%)
  6. x86_64-gnu-llvm-20: 2461.1s -> 2770.5s (+12.6%)
  7. aarch64-gnu-llvm-20-1: 3342.6s -> 3758.7s (+12.4%)
  8. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 2826.0s -> 3173.3s (+12.3%)
  9. armhf-gnu: 4919.9s -> 5509.5s (+12.0%)
  10. x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-1: 3185.1s -> 3564.6s (+11.9%)
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
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (5bc3450): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -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)
-0.2% [-0.4%, -0.1%] 8
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.4% [-1.4%, -0.1%] 28
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.2% [-0.4%, -0.1%] 8

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.8%, secondary -2.8%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
1.8% [1.6%, 2.1%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.8% [-2.8%, -2.8%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.8% [1.6%, 2.1%] 2

Cycles

Results (primary -2.2%, secondary -1.9%)

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)
-2.2% [-2.3%, -2.1%] 3
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.9% [-1.9%, -1.9%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) -2.2% [-2.3%, -2.1%] 3

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 472.922s -> 473.701s (0.16%)
Artifact size: 389.01 MiB -> 389.02 MiB (0.00%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants