[perf] test MCP510

[lqd]

r? @ghost

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (4cb98396e9dc17fbe9b0da2b1bd35d9b05fff30c): 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

Warning ⚠: The following benchmark(s) failed to build:

• rustc

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)	-34.1%	[-74.8%, -0.6%]	31
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-32.7%	[-74.0%, -3.7%]	74
All ❌✅ (primary)	-34.1%	[-74.8%, -0.6%]	31

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)	27.8%	[21.9%, 33.7%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.3%	[2.3%, 2.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	27.8%	[21.9%, 33.7%]	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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-32.3%	[-65.9%, -1.4%]	28
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-28.4%	[-64.8%, -3.3%]	73
All ❌✅ (primary)	-32.3%	[-65.9%, -1.4%]	28

Binary size

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)	1.6%	[0.6%, 2.4%]	20
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.5%	[0.4%, 1.1%]	61
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-0.4%, -0.1%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.6%	[0.6%, 2.4%]	20

Bootstrap: missing data

[lqd]

The data gathering is done so I'll close this for now, but may reopen to rerun crater on these new try artifacts.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 621e94b (621e94b4dbb812275cb66899eed6f57ccd49ea3e, parent: d5525a73009e2c61b09daa69df79064530bd4dcf)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (621e94b): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.0%	[0.2%, 16.2%]	96
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.9%	[0.1%, 15.7%]	112
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.6%, -0.2%]	7
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-1.0%, -0.0%]	21
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.7%	[-0.6%, 16.2%]	103

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 11.0%, secondary 5.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	12.5%	[0.8%, 29.7%]	9
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	11.4%	[0.7%, 43.3%]	15
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.8%	[-7.3%, -1.1%]	11
All ❌✅ (primary)	11.0%	[-2.1%, 29.7%]	10

Cycles

Results (primary 4.5%, secondary 4.9%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	4.9%	[2.1%, 9.2%]	18
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.9%	[1.9%, 7.4%]	28
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.5%	[-2.5%, -2.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	4.5%	[-2.5%, 9.2%]	19

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 472.272s -> 473.236s (0.20%)
Artifact size: 389.04 MiB -> 386.94 MiB (-0.54%)

[lqd]

note to self about the experiment: "finalized lazy construction of the polonius localized constraints, -Zpolonius=next enabled so tests will fail"

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (a1558d5): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.7%	[0.1%, 14.9%]	97
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.7%	[0.1%, 14.5%]	117
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.3%, -0.2%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.4%	[-0.6%, -0.2%]	12
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.6%	[-0.3%, 14.9%]	100

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 3.2%, secondary 2.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	4.6%	[2.0%, 7.5%]	6
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	5.1%	[0.9%, 12.2%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-0.9%, -0.8%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.2%	[-4.9%, -3.7%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.2%	[-0.9%, 7.5%]	8

Cycles

Results (primary 4.4%, secondary 4.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	4.4%	[2.1%, 8.7%]	27
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.4%	[1.9%, 6.9%]	23
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	4.4%	[2.1%, 8.7%]	27

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 474.542s -> 476.053s (0.32%)
Artifact size: 390.84 MiB -> 390.59 MiB (-0.06%)