Branch Clause from Predicate

[spastorino]

r? @oli-obk

This is part of what's proposed in rust-lang/compiler-team#531

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy

cc @rust-lang/clippy

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job x86_64-gnu-tools failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

.......... (80/90)
.......... (90/90)


/checkout/src/test/rustdoc-gui/basic-code.goml basic-code... FAILED
[ERROR] (line 3) Error: Execution context was destroyed, most likely because of a navigation.: for command `assert-count: (".src-line-numbers", 1)`
Build completed unsuccessfully in 0:02:22

[oli-obk]

@bors r+ p=1 bitrotty

[bors]

📌 Commit 974e283 has been approved by oli-obk

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 974e283 with merge 051cab2...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing 051cab2 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (051cab2): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - ACTION NEEDED

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

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

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.8%	[0.2%, 2.4%]	38
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.4%	[0.3%, 0.8%]	5
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.8%	[0.2%, 2.4%]	38

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.1%	[1.8%, 2.3%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.0%	[-4.7%, -2.9%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

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

[oli-obk]

The diesel regression is

  244,159,238  ???:<rustc_trait_selection::traits::fulfill::FulfillmentContext as rustc_infer::traits::engine::TraitEngine>::register_predicate_obligation
  128,790,199  ???:rustc_trait_selection::traits::wf::predicate_obligations
 -112,762,937  ???:<&mut rustc_hir_analysis::check::wfcheck::check_where_clauses::{closure
   70,951,310  ???:rustc_middle::ty::util::fold_list::<rustc_infer::infer::canonical::canonicalizer::Canonicalizer, rustc_middle::ty::Predicate, <&rustc_middle::ty::list::List<rustc_middle::ty::Predicate> as rustc_middle::ty::fold::TypeFoldable>::try_fold_with<rustc_infer::infer::canonical::canonicalizer::Canonicalizer>::{closure
   37,831,490  ???:<rustc_middle::ty::context::CtxtInterners>::intern_predicate
   24,179,850  ???:<rustc_infer::infer::InferCtxt>::resolve_vars_if_possible::<rustc_infer::traits::Obligation<rustc_middle::ty::Predicate>>
   21,434,192  ???:<rustc_trait_selection::traits::fulfill::FulfillProcessor as rustc_data_structures::obligation_forest::ObligationProcessor>::process_obligation

We should figure out what part of this PR caused this

[spastorino]

@rustbot label +perf-regression-triaged

We're aware of this regression, and I've opened #105060 to track it. We would need to intern Clauses in order to make the memory used lower, comparisons (comparing references) faster and such. After @oli-obk lands some stuff he is doing, I'm going complete the thing by interning Clauses.