-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
[PERF] eagerly compute sub_relations
again
#140752
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
While still only using them for diagnostics. We could use them for cycle detection in generalization and it seems desirable to do so in the future. However, this is unsound with the old trait solver as its cache does not track these `sub_relations` in any way. We would also need to consider them when canonicalizing as otherwise instantiating the canonical response may fail.
This allows canonical queries to also rely on them in the future. It also means it would now be sound to rely on `sub_relations` in the generalizer.
changes to the core type system Some changes occurred to the core trait solver cc @rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor |
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
[PERF] eagerly compute `sub_relations` again perf run for rust-lang#140375 r? ghost
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Finished benchmarking commit (bbf9bd9): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text belowBenchmarking 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 @bors rollup=never Instruction countThis is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 0.4%, secondary 3.2%)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.
CyclesResults (primary 0.4%)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.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 770.356s -> 768.561s (-0.23%) |
perf run for #140375
r? ghost