Fix perf regression by correctly matching keywords

[WaffleLapkin]

This should (hopefully) fix regression from #99918

r? @estebank

[BoxyUwU]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 7e9fa83c3100e120dd8602a59b92a39fdd850b17 with merge 4d7446b594be5087c374d6690345989c3382a204...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 4d7446b594be5087c374d6690345989c3382a204 (4d7446b594be5087c374d6690345989c3382a204)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (4d7446b594be5087c374d6690345989c3382a204): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

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

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
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.2%]	22
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.8%	[-1.2%, -0.5%]	9
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.2%]	22

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)	0.6%	[0.5%, 0.6%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.6%	[2.1%, 3.2%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.3%	[-4.3%, -4.3%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.6%	[0.5%, 0.6%]	2

Cycles

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.3%	[-2.3%, -2.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.3%	[-2.3%, -2.3%]	1

[estebank]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 7e9fa83c3100e120dd8602a59b92a39fdd850b17 has been approved by estebank

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #104418) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[WaffleLapkin]

rebased to fix the merge conflict

[estebank]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit e2a2816 has been approved by estebank

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[Jerrody]

@WaffleLapkin
It's interesting for me to understand. Why does using case instead of Case::Insensitive give a perf boost?

[WaffleLapkin]

@Jerrody first of all I want to highlight that using Case::Insensitive on non-error path is invalid.

Case::Insensitive leads to .to_lowercase() calls which allocate a string and convert the case, that's why not using it fixes the perf regression.

[Jerrody]

@Jerrody first of all I want to highlight that using Case::Insensitive on non-error path is invalid.

Case::Insensitive leads to .to_lowercase() calls which allocate a string and convert the case, that's why not using it fixes the perf regression.

Okay, thanks for the explanation! Keep work you make not big, but very useful work for the compiler: clearing, refactoring and simplifying code. Very cool.

P.S.
I also want to contribute to the compiler, but I don't know how even with compiler book lang developing like a dark forest for me.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit e2a2816 with merge 70f8737...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: estebank
Pushing 70f8737 to master...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: estebank
Pushing 70f8737 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (70f8737): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

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
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.2%]	32
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.8%	[-1.1%, -0.5%]	8
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.2%]	32

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)	1.5%	[1.5%, 1.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-1.3%, -0.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-1.3%, -0.5%]	2

Cycles

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)	1.8%	[1.5%, 2.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0