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

find_field does not need to be a query. #127718

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 15, 2024
Merged

Conversation

cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

The current implementation is quadratic in the number of nested fields.

r? @davidtwco as you reviewed #115367
Fixes #121755

@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 Jul 14, 2024
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

r=me after perf

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jul 14, 2024
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2024
find_field does not need to be a query.

The current implementation is quadratic in the number of nested fields.

r? `@davidtwco` as you reviewed rust-lang#115367
Fixes rust-lang#121755
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 14, 2024

⌛ Trying commit b494d98 with merge 58be51f...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 14, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 58be51f (58be51f56221a50dc8ae15cdff3a1c7efbf8d81c)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (58be51f): 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-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
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-7.6% [-13.5%, -2.7%] 9
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results (secondary -2.1%)

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)
2.6% [2.3%, 3.2%] 4
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-6.8% [-10.2%, -2.9%] 4
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 699.561s -> 700.029s (0.07%)
Artifact size: 328.65 MiB -> 328.60 MiB (-0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jul 14, 2024
@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors r=compiler-errors

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 14, 2024

📌 Commit b494d98 has been approved by compiler-errors

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 Jul 14, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 14, 2024

⌛ Testing commit b494d98 with merge 8b72d7a...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 15, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: compiler-errors
Pushing 8b72d7a to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jul 15, 2024
@bors bors merged commit 8b72d7a into rust-lang:master Jul 15, 2024
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.81.0 milestone Jul 15, 2024
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (8b72d7a): 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
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-7.5% [-13.5%, -2.7%] 9
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -3.1%)

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)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.1% [-3.1%, -3.1%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results (secondary 3.0%)

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)
11.1% [9.2%, 13.1%] 6
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-6.7% [-9.6%, -3.6%] 5
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 701.292s -> 701.123s (-0.02%)
Artifact size: 328.63 MiB -> 328.64 MiB (0.00%)

@cjgillot cjgillot deleted the find_field branch July 16, 2024 01:22
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.

ICE: forcing query with already existing 'DepNode'
6 participants