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.

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

Switched provisional evaluation cache map to FxIndexMap, and replaced map.drain_filter with map.retain #110069

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 8, 2023
Merged

Switched provisional evaluation cache map to FxIndexMap, and replaced map.drain_filter with map.retain #110069

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 8, 2023

Conversation

ndrewxie
Copy link
Contributor

@ndrewxie ndrewxie commented Apr 8, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Switching ProvisionalEvaluationCache's map field from FxHashMap to FxIndexMap was previously blocked because doing so caused performance regressions that could be mitigated by the stabilization of drain_filter for FxIndexMap (#104212). However, the only use of drain_filter can be replaced with a retain, so I made the modification and put in a PR to see if this causes a performance regression as well.

This PR is part of a broader effort (#84447) of removing iteration through FxHashMaps, as the iteration order is unstable and can cause issues in incremental compilation.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Apr 8, 2023

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @b-naber (or someone else) soon.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information. Namely, in order to ensure the minimum review times lag, PR authors and assigned reviewers should ensure that the review label (S-waiting-on-review and S-waiting-on-author) stays updated, invoking these commands when appropriate:

  • @rustbot author: the review is finished, PR author should check the comments and take action accordingly
  • @rustbot review: the author is ready for a review, this PR will be queued again in the reviewer's queue

@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 Apr 8, 2023
@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

@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 Apr 8, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 8, 2023

⌛ Trying commit 9920bab with merge 2203cdb35a934fd32e910914f6808feaf83e1cdc...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 8, 2023

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 2203cdb35a934fd32e910914f6808feaf83e1cdc (2203cdb35a934fd32e910914f6808feaf83e1cdc)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (2203cdb35a934fd32e910914f6808feaf83e1cdc): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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)		 0.4% [0.4%, 0.4%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

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)		 3.5% [3.5%, 3.5%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

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

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Apr 8, 2023
@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

cjgillot commented Apr 8, 2023

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 8, 2023

📌 Commit 9920bab has been approved by cjgillot

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 Apr 8, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 8, 2023

⌛ Testing commit 9920bab with merge 66f8dd1...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 8, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: cjgillot
Pushing 66f8dd1 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Apr 8, 2023
@bors bors merged commit 66f8dd1 into rust-lang:master Apr 8, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.70.0 milestone Apr 8, 2023
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (66f8dd1): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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)		 0.4% [0.4%, 0.4%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

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)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -3.5% [-3.5%, -3.5%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@b-naber b-naber

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
Milestone
1.70.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@ndrewxie @rustbot @workingjubilee @rust-timer @bors @cjgillot @b-naber