Skip to content
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.

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

Rollup of 13 pull requests #104428

Merged
merged 33 commits into from
Nov 15, 2022
Merged

Rollup of 13 pull requests #104428

merged 33 commits into from
Nov 15, 2022

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

andrewpollack and others added 30 commits November 11, 2022 18:44
This was originally a part of rust-lang#100316.
However, extracting it to a seperate PR should help with any extra
testing that might be needed.

Signed-off-by: Ayush Singh <[email protected]>
please, please, don't match on `Symbol::as_str`s, every time you do,
somewhere in the world another waffle becomes sad...
Spotted by @RalfJung. This causes no behavioural changes.
Because it's always empty.
…ipt, r=tmandry

Adding Fuchsia compiler testing script, docs

Adding Fuchsia compiler testing script and related docs updates

r? `@tmandry`

cc. `@djkoloski`
Remove leading newlines from `NonZero*` doc examples

Like rust-lang#103045, but for `NonZero*`.

`@rustbot` label A-docs
…nTitor

Update compiler-builtins

This was originally a part of rust-lang#100316. However, extracting it to a seperate PR should help with any extra testing that might be needed.

Signed-off-by: Ayush Singh <[email protected]>
…r=GuillaumeGomez

rustdoc: remove unused CSS `code { opacity: 1 }`

According to https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/266220-rustdoc/topic/CSS.20cleanup this style was added for declarations that no longer use opacity.
Remove dead NoneError diagnostic handling

`NoneError` was removed some time ago, so this was dead code.
…em, r=compiler-errors

Remove unused symbols and diagnostic items

As the title suggests, this removes unused symbols from `sym::` and `#[rustc_diagnostic_item]` annotations that weren't mentioned anywhere.

Originally I tried to use grep, to find symbols and item names that are never mentioned via `sym::name`, however this produced a lot of false positives (?), for example clippy matching on `Symbol::as_str` or macros "implicitly" adding `sym::`. I ended up fixing all these false positives (?) by hand, but tbh I'm not sure if it was worth it...
…ackh726

Deriving cleanups

Fixing some minor problems `@RalfJung` found in rust-lang#99046.

r? `@RalfJung`
…ation, r=notriddle

Fix missing minification for static files

It's a fix for rust-lang#101702.

The problem was that `Path::ends_with` doesn't do what we thought it does: it checks if the entire item is the last path part, no just if the "path string" ends with the given argument. So instead, I just used the `extension()` method to get the information we want.

cc `@jsha`
r? `@notriddle`

PS: Is it worth it to add a CI test to ensure that the minification was performed on JS and CSS files or not?
@rustbot rustbot added T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Nov 15, 2022
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=10

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 15, 2022

📌 Commit 7c7cb71 has been approved by matthiaskrgr

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 Nov 15, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 15, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 7c7cb71 with merge ca92d90...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 15, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing ca92d90 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Nov 15, 2022
@bors bors merged commit ca92d90 into rust-lang:master Nov 15, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.67.0 milestone Nov 15, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (ca92d90): 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)
1.2% [0.3%, 3.3%] 14
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.1% [0.3%, 3.3%] 23
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.2% [0.3%, 3.3%] 14

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)
1.3% [0.5%, 2.1%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
4.8% [1.1%, 10.8%] 8
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.6% [-4.0%, -1.1%] 8
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.3% [0.5%, 2.1%] 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)
2.3% [2.3%, 2.3%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.2% [1.7%, 2.5%] 12
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.5% [-3.5%, -3.5%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.3% [2.3%, 2.3%] 1

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Nov 15, 2022
@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor

All the regressions are in doc builds. I'm guessing #104404 is the most likely cause.
cc @GuillaumeGomez

@rust-timer build d5d26c0b90e16abe95721abdd3af630a23efd02b

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (d5d26c0b90e16abe95721abdd3af630a23efd02b): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@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)
1.2% [0.4%, 3.2%] 14
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.1% [0.4%, 3.3%] 23
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.5% [-0.5%, -0.5%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.2% [0.4%, 3.2%] 14

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)
3.0% [2.8%, 3.1%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.9% [-0.9%, -0.9%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

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)
2.9% [2.9%, 2.9%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.6% [2.2%, 3.0%] 14
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.9% [2.9%, 2.9%] 1

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Nov 16, 2022
@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor

Yep, #104404 is definitely the cause of the regression.

@rylev
Copy link
Member

rylev commented Nov 22, 2022

Justification for this regression was posted #104404. Effectively this regression is taking us back to the baseline.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Nov 22, 2022
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the rollup-jo3078i branch December 22, 2022 10:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. 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. T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.