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

finish Reveal removal #133242

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

finish Reveal removal #133242

wants to merge 7 commits into from
+342 −524

Conversation

lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

@lcnr lcnr commented Nov 20, 2024

After #133212 changed the TypingMode to be the only source of truth, this entirely rips out Reveal.

cc #132279

r? @compiler-errors

@rustbot rustbot added PG-exploit-mitigations Project group: Exploit mitigations 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. WG-trait-system-refactor The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver) labels Nov 20, 2024
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Nov 20, 2024

changes to the core type system

cc @compiler-errors, @lcnr

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri interpreter

cc @rust-lang/miri, @rust-lang/wg-const-eval

Some changes occurred in match checking

cc @Nadrieril

Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy

cc @rust-lang/clippy

Some changes occurred in exhaustiveness checking

cc @Nadrieril

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_cranelift

cc @bjorn3

Some changes occurred in tests/ui/sanitizer

cc @rust-lang/project-exploit-mitigations, @rcvalle

Some changes occurred to the core trait solver

cc @rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor

@lcnr lcnr force-pushed the questionable-uwu branch 3 times, most recently from 7a16b56 to 08c4525 Compare November 20, 2024 11:13
@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor Author

lcnr commented Nov 20, 2024

@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 Nov 20, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 20, 2024

⌛ Trying commit 08c4525 with merge e7c53b1...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Nov 20, 2024
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#133242 - lcnr:questionable-uwu, r=<try>
e7c53b1 
finish `Reveal` removal

After rust-lang#133212 changed the `TypingMode` to be the only source of truth, this entirely rips out `Reveal`.

cc rust-lang#132279

r? `@compiler-errors`
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 20, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: e7c53b1 (e7c53b1e368d28c379a0c14a4c0718cf45ef2dd5)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (e7c53b1): comparison URL.

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

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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

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

Instruction count

This 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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 1.8% [1.8%, 1.8%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -0.6% [-1.4%, -0.2%] 22
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -3.3% [-9.2%, -0.1%] 12
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.6% [-1.4%, -0.2%] 22

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.3%, 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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 1.7% [1.7%, 1.7%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 3.2% [2.9%, 3.4%] 3
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -3.0% [-3.8%, -2.3%] 5
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -2.3% [-3.8%, 1.7%] 6

Cycles

Results (primary -1.4%, secondary -6.1%)

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)		 -1.4% [-1.7%, -1.2%] 8
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -6.1% [-9.3%, -2.2%] 6
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.4% [-1.7%, -1.2%] 8

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 793.177s -> 793.562s (0.05%)
Artifact size: 335.96 MiB -> 336.05 MiB (0.03%)

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Nov 20, 2024
@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor Author

lcnr commented Nov 20, 2024

@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 Nov 20, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 20, 2024

⌛ Trying commit af0d83a with merge 546d974...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Nov 20, 2024
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#133242 - lcnr:questionable-uwu, r=<try>
546d974 
finish `Reveal` removal

After rust-lang#133212 changed the `TypingMode` to be the only source of truth, this entirely rips out `Reveal`.

cc rust-lang#132279

r? `@compiler-errors`
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 20, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 546d974 (546d97442244c95e308661462ac7d8d89189497b)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (546d974): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text below

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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

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

Instruction count

This 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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 0.6% [0.2%, 3.6%] 13
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 0.3% [0.2%, 0.4%] 23
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -1.3% [-1.3%, -1.3%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.6% [0.2%, 3.6%] 13

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.4%, secondary 2.6%)

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)		 1.4% [0.5%, 3.3%] 11
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 2.6% [1.1%, 3.3%] 4
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.4% [0.5%, 3.3%] 11

Cycles

Results (primary 4.3%)

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)		 4.3% [3.1%, 5.5%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 4.3% [3.1%, 5.5%] 2

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 793.512s -> 793.496s (-0.00%)
Artifact size: 335.99 MiB -> 335.99 MiB (0.00%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Nov 20, 2024
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

Can you open a tracking issue to write a packing implementation of TypingEnv?

compiler-errors
compiler-errors approved these changes Nov 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
compiler/rustc_middle/src/query/mod.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/post_analysis_normalize.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
compiler/rustc_type_ir/src/solve/mod.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

r=me

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor Author

lcnr commented Nov 22, 2024

Can you open a tracking issue to write a packing implementation of TypingEnv?

opened #133242

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Nov 22, 2024

Some changes occurred in src/tools/cargo

cc @ehuss

@lcnr lcnr force-pushed the questionable-uwu branch 2 times, most recently from aa7f0d6 to 49d122f Compare November 22, 2024 11:16
@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor Author

lcnr commented Nov 22, 2024 •
edited
Loading

accidentally committed submodule changes, reverted these again

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
lcnr
lcnr commented Nov 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/lint_tail_expr_drop_order.rs
@@ -359,15 +354,15 @@ pub(crate) fn run_lint<'tcx>(tcx: TyCtxt<'tcx>, def_id: LocalDefId, body: &Body<
// We group them per-block because they tend to scheduled in the same drop ladder block.
let mut bid_per_block = IndexMap::default();
let mut bid_places = UnordSet::new();
let param_env = tcx.param_env(def_id).with_reveal_all_normalized(tcx);
let typing_env = ty::TypingEnv::post_analysis(tcx, def_id);
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why does this lint use Reveal::All?

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor Author

lcnr commented Nov 22, 2024

@bors r=compiler-errors,BoxyUwU rollup=never

the perf impact is real but imo acceptable. implementing #133336 should give us some of it back

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 22, 2024

📌 Commit 947ada5 has been approved by compiler-errors,BoxyUwU

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 Nov 22, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@compiler-errors compiler-errors compiler-errors approved these changes

Assignees

@compiler-errors compiler-errors

Labels
perf-regression Performance regression. PG-exploit-mitigations Project group: Exploit mitigations 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. WG-trait-system-refactor The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver)
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@lcnr @rustbot @rust-timer @bors @rust-log-analyzer @compiler-errors