Revert perf-regression 101620

[cjgillot]

Reverts #101862 #101620

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit a4708ad with merge 4ed50b7...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 4ed50b7 (4ed50b77a11b5371d2119b3a7fb491f7006f95b1)

[rust-timer]

Queued 4ed50b7 with parent cd8cc91, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (4ed50b7): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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.

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-review -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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	5.5%	[0.3%, 33.5%]	34
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.2%	[0.3%, 1.8%]	13
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.7%	[-12.5%, -0.3%]	126
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.1%	[-19.1%, -0.1%]	122
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.8%	[-12.5%, 33.5%]	160

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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	4.3%	[0.8%, 10.9%]	13
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.0%	[3.0%, 3.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-4.2%	[-12.9%, -1.1%]	105
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-7.6%	[-22.2%, -1.2%]	66
All ❌✅ (primary)	-3.3%	[-12.9%, 10.9%]	118

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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	14.3%	[2.7%, 45.0%]	19
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.8%	[2.5%, 5.6%]	5
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-4.8%	[-13.7%, -1.2%]	82
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-8.7%	[-24.1%, -2.0%]	60
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.2%	[-13.7%, 45.0%]	101

Footnotes

1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩² ↩³

2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩² ↩³

[Mark-Simulacrum]

r=me, I guess needs a rebase.

Regressions are expected (we're reverting a PR that did improve performance on a subset of benchmarks) but overall the regressions there and the improvements here outweigh each other -- we see a 1.8% improvement in the primary benchmarks overall.

[cjgillot]

@bors r=Mark-Simulacrum

[bors]

📌 Commit 3916434 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[cjgillot]

@bors r=Mark-Simulacrum

[bors]

📌 Commit fc43df0 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit fc43df0 with merge ce292b9...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[lqd]

@bors retry "GitHub Actions has encountered an internal error when running your job" on dist-mips64el-linux_ubuntu-20_04-xl

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit fc43df0 with merge 6e86aa4...

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit fc43df0 with merge 8ec69a5...

[bors]

💥 Test timed out

[rust-log-analyzer]

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

[cjgillot]

@bors retry

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit fc43df0 with merge bb5a01617589b5e3ece5a36435fc285bfd13c9a4...

[rust-log-analyzer]

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing bb5a016 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (bb5a016): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	5.6%	[0.3%, 33.5%]	33
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.1%	[0.3%, 1.5%]	11
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.7%	[-12.3%, -0.3%]	129
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.1%	[-19.0%, -0.2%]	121
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.8%	[-12.3%, 33.5%]	162

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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.6%	[1.1%, 10.2%]	17
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.5%	[2.1%, 3.1%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-4.2%	[-13.0%, -0.9%]	100
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-8.0%	[-22.1%, -1.5%]	60
All ❌✅ (primary)	-3.0%	[-13.0%, 10.2%]	117

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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	15.4%	[2.6%, 42.8%]	17
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-4.8%	[-13.4%, -1.4%]	89
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-9.4%	[-24.6%, -2.3%]	56
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.6%	[-13.4%, 42.8%]	106

Footnotes

1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩² ↩³

2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩² ↩³