Skip to content

Encode hir attributes cross-crate properly #142777

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 25, 2025
Merged

Encode hir attributes cross-crate properly #142777

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 25, 2025
+55 −10

Conversation

jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor

@jdonszelmann jdonszelmann commented Jun 20, 2025 •
edited by rustbot
Loading

r? @oli-obk

This should return the lost perf in #138165

cc: @therealprof

@rustbot rustbot added A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) 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 Jun 20, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jun 20, 2025

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@jdonszelmann jdonszelmann force-pushed the restore-encode-cross-crate branch from 14a280f to a1e655d Compare June 20, 2025 09:27
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Jun 20, 2025

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jun 20, 2025
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 20, 2025
@bors
Auto merge of #142777 - jdonszelmann:restore-encode-cross-crate, r=<try>
3d3aa78 
Encode hir attributes cross-crate properly

r? `@oli-obk`

This should return the lost perf in #138165

cc: `@therealprof`
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 20, 2025

⌛ Trying commit a1e655d with merge 3d3aa78...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 20, 2025

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 3d3aa78 (3d3aa7894aface06da60fe7023a7ad0455576db7)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (3d3aa78): comparison URL.

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

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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@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)		 2.7% [2.7%, 2.7%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -0.4% [-0.8%, -0.2%] 13
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -0.6% [-0.8%, -0.2%] 20
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.1% [-0.8%, 2.7%] 14

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.3%, secondary -2.0%)

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)		 -1.3% [-1.4%, -1.2%] 3
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -2.0% [-3.0%, -0.7%] 12
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.3% [-1.4%, -1.2%] 3

Cycles

Results (primary 2.9%)

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

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

Binary size

Results (primary -0.1%, secondary -0.2%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 1.1% [1.1%, 1.1%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -0.2% [-0.6%, -0.0%] 85
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -0.2% [-0.8%, -0.0%] 40
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.1% [-0.6%, 1.1%] 86

Bootstrap: 691.482s -> 692.142s (0.10%)
Artifact size: 371.94 MiB -> 371.94 MiB (0.00%)

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Jun 21, 2025
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Jun 21, 2025

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 21, 2025

📌 Commit a1e655d has been approved by oli-obk

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-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 21, 2025
@therealprof
Copy link
Contributor

@jdonszelmann Sweet, thanks for looking into it.

@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

still don't get the +2.7% on clap

@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

@therealprof is it a problem that the perf regression is now going to be on Beta? I believe the cutoff for that just happened

@rylev rylev mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2025
Merged
@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

forcing rollup=never drain:

@bors p=5

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 25, 2025
@bors
Auto merge of #142777 - jdonszelmann:restore-encode-cross-crate, r=ol…
c545bad 
…i-obk

Encode hir attributes cross-crate properly

r? `@oli-obk`

This should return the lost perf in #138165

cc: `@therealprof`
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 25, 2025

⌛ Testing commit a1e655d with merge c545bad...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 25, 2025

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jun 25, 2025
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@jdonszelmann jdonszelmann mentioned this pull request Jun 25, 2025
Open
@jdonszelmann jdonszelmann force-pushed the restore-encode-cross-crate branch from a1e655d to 64a1a98 Compare June 25, 2025 20:11
@jdonszelmann jdonszelmann mentioned this pull request Jun 25, 2025
Closed
@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 25, 2025

📌 Commit 64a1a98 has been approved by jdonszelmann

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-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 25, 2025
@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

ah shit,

@bors r-
@bors r=oli-obk

@bors bors 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-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jun 25, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 25, 2025

📌 Commit 64a1a98 has been approved by oli-obk

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 Jun 25, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 25, 2025

⌛ Testing commit 64a1a98 with merge 0fa4ec6...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 25, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing 0fa4ec6 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jun 25, 2025
@bors bors merged commit 0fa4ec6 into rust-lang:master Jun 25, 2025
11 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.90.0 milestone Jun 25, 2025
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

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 d14d202 (parent) -> 0fa4ec6 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 4 test diffs

4 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 0fa4ec6cde46fa17ab07acb5531cfe0dc1349ffa --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. x86_64-apple-2: 3909.6s -> 5022.5s (28.5%)
  2. dist-x86_64-apple: 7812.6s -> 9968.9s (27.6%)
  3. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 2487.9s -> 2935.6s (18.0%)
  4. x86_64-gnu-tools: 3287.5s -> 3795.6s (15.5%)
  5. x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-1: 3286.5s -> 3744.0s (13.9%)
  6. dist-aarch64-apple: 6040.1s -> 5296.5s (-12.3%)
  7. aarch64-gnu-debug: 3662.4s -> 4088.2s (11.6%)
  8. i686-gnu-2: 5682.3s -> 6318.8s (11.2%)
  9. i686-gnu-1: 7275.1s -> 8085.5s (11.1%)
  10. mingw-check-1: 1575.1s -> 1748.2s (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
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (0fa4ec6): 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)		 -0.4% [-1.4%, -0.1%] 16
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -0.6% [-1.3%, -0.2%] 20
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.4% [-1.4%, -0.1%] 16

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.1%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 3.4% [3.4%, 3.4%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -1.7% [-4.7%, -0.9%] 7
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.1% [-4.7%, 3.4%] 8

Cycles

Results (secondary 1.5%)

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)		 1.5% [1.5%, 1.5%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

Results (primary -0.2%, secondary -0.2%)

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)		 -0.2% [-0.6%, -0.0%] 86
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -0.2% [-0.8%, -0.0%] 40
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.2% [-0.6%, -0.0%] 86

Bootstrap: 689.033s -> 689.313s (0.04%)
Artifact size: 372.09 MiB -> 372.06 MiB (-0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the perf-regression Performance regression. label Jun 26, 2025
@jdonszelmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

well, that seems to have had positive effects. Maybe not perfect but it's good that that merged @therealprof :)

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

@oli-obk oli-obk oli-obk approved these changes

Assignees

@oli-obk oli-obk

Labels
A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) 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
Milestone
1.90.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
8 participants
@jdonszelmann @rustbot @rust-log-analyzer @oli-obk @rust-timer @bors @therealprof @workingjubilee