perf: Test impact of never removing noop landing pads - #160095
Conversation
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
perf: Test impact of never removing noop landing pads
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
|
I believe this (disabling the MIR pass) doesn’t disable the post-mono version of the pass added in #143208 |
|
Ah, in the context of the linked PR it might be okay and expected to only disable the MIR pass. But more generally it seems interesting whether the post-mono version matters because that too should be only an optimization that arguably should be affected by |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (8920a79): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read:Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf. Next, please: If you can, justify the regressions found in this try perf run in writing along with @bors rollup=never rustc-perf Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -0.6%, secondary -2.5%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesResults (primary -1.8%, secondary 0.5%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeResults (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.4%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Bootstrap: 490.165s -> 489.361s (-0.16%) |
#160015 (comment)
r? ghost