Rebased: Mark drop calls in landing pads cold instead of noinline #102099

InnovativeInventor · 2022-09-21T14:09:07Z

I noticed that certain inlining optimizations were missing while staring at some compiled code output. I'd like to see this relanded, so I rebased the PR from @erikdesjardins (PR #94823).

This PR reapplies #92419, which was reverted in #94402 due to #94390.

Fixes #46515, fixes #87055.

Update: fixes #97217.

rustbot · 2022-09-21T14:09:11Z

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc

cc @antoyo

rust-highfive · 2022-09-21T14:09:11Z

r? @davidtwco

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

davidtwco · 2022-09-21T14:25:13Z

r? @nagisa

nagisa · 2022-09-22T11:34:51Z

Please adjust the PR description to include the motivation (@nikic’s comment) explaining why it is okay to reapply the patch.

r=me otherwise.

compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc/src/builder.rs

nikic · 2022-09-30T20:44:08Z

Probably fixes #97217 as well.

Kobzol · 2022-10-01T16:02:16Z

We should also check perf. before relanding. (I don't know if this PR is ready for that, so I didn't schedule it yet to avoid spam).

nagisa · 2022-10-01T18:24:31Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

rust-timer · 2022-10-01T18:24:33Z

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: S-waiting-on-perf

bors · 2022-10-01T18:25:13Z

⌛ Trying commit d1ddf27de674cddc714f857f5ff76cbf315460e6 with merge 252b42173601b80baba38d146cd7ca8f59813819...

lqd · 2022-10-01T18:48:50Z

Did anything change in serde since last time, or are we accepting that merging this will "reopen" #94390 (it's not closed, but supposedly fixed) -- does https://github.com/MarkDDR/long_compile_rustc_1.59.0 still build slowly with this PR compared to nightly ?

nikic · 2022-10-01T18:56:24Z

@lqd I don't know if anything changed in serde, but the intention here is indeed to potentially regress compile-time for certain types of excessively large machine-generated code in favor of fixing a class of common optimization failures.

lqd · 2022-10-01T19:13:32Z

It would be reassuring to have an idea on how common these excessively large cases are, but I don't think we have such data. It feels like it should be rare to me, and worth the better codegen for the general case.

Because of the tradeoff, do we know if that's a call that t-compiler should make (at their next meeting) or is wg-llvm signoff enough ?

bors · 2022-10-01T19:56:07Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 252b42173601b80baba38d146cd7ca8f59813819 (252b42173601b80baba38d146cd7ca8f59813819)

rust-timer · 2022-10-01T19:56:09Z

Queued 252b42173601b80baba38d146cd7ca8f59813819 with parent edadc7c, future comparison URL.

rust-timer · 2022-10-02T01:02:35Z

Finished benchmarking commit (252b42173601b80baba38d146cd7ca8f59813819): 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)	1.1%	[0.5%, 3.9%]	12
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.3%	[1.7%, 4.8%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-3.5%, -0.2%]	160
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.8%	[-5.0%, -0.2%]	128
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.5%	[-3.5%, 3.9%]	172

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)	2.2%	[0.8%, 3.7%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.3%	[2.1%, 4.8%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.2%	[0.8%, 3.7%]	3

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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.2%	[3.2%, 3.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.4%	[-4.7%, -1.6%]	5
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.5%	[-3.2%, -2.0%]	9
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.4%	[-4.7%, -1.6%]	5

the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩² ↩³
number of relevant changes ↩ ↩² ↩³

nagisa · 2022-11-05T14:18:33Z

Looking at the perf results, it seems like the one-off regressions are LLVM doing more stuff in some instances. Not super much more, but also quite expected given that LLVM now has a free pass to inline a bunch more code.

bors · 2023-10-02T11:29:28Z

⌛ Testing commit 5bcf4f2 with merge 41a28aa...

…ikic Rebased: Mark drop calls in landing pads cold instead of noinline I noticed that certain inlining optimizations were missing while staring at some compiled code output. I'd like to see this relanded, so I rebased the PR from `@erikdesjardins` (PR rust-lang#94823). This PR reapplies rust-lang#92419, which was reverted in rust-lang#94402 due to rust-lang#94390. Fixes rust-lang#46515, fixes rust-lang#87055. Update: fixes rust-lang#97217.

bors · 2023-10-02T15:44:28Z

💥 Test timed out

rust-log-analyzer · 2023-10-02T15:57:16Z

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

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

nikic · 2023-10-02T20:26:03Z

Looks spurious:

2023-10-02T15:06:15.1832520Z �[0m�[0m�[1m�[32m    Updating�[0m crates.io index
2023-10-02T15:56:43.8689800Z ##[error]The operation was canceled.

@bors retry

bors · 2023-10-02T22:02:16Z

⌛ Testing commit 5bcf4f2 with merge 2e5a9dd...

bors · 2023-10-02T23:50:05Z

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: nikic
Pushing 2e5a9dd to master...

rust-timer · 2023-10-03T01:12:16Z

Finished benchmarking commit (2e5a9dd): 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.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.5%	[0.3%, 5.9%]	12
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.7%	[0.4%, 7.7%]	5
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.5%	[-4.5%, -0.2%]	78
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.9%	[-6.9%, -0.1%]	65
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-4.5%, 5.9%]	90

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)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.1%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.4%	[3.0%, 3.8%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-7.0%	[-7.0%, -7.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-3.5%	[-7.0%, 0.1%]	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)	1.6%	[1.0%, 4.0%]	6
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.8%	[2.7%, 7.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.2%	[-5.7%, -1.2%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.9%	[-6.9%, -0.9%]	9
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-5.7%, 4.0%]	12

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)	0.7%	[0.1%, 1.3%]	20
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.2%	[2.1%, 2.3%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.9%	[-5.5%, -0.0%]	35
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-5.4%	[-11.2%, -0.2%]	10
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.0%	[-5.5%, 1.3%]	55

Bootstrap: 629.674s -> 624.341s (-0.85%)
Artifact size: 273.32 MiB -> 271.92 MiB (-0.51%)

rylev · 2023-10-03T14:06:26Z

@nikic @InnovativeInventor - I'm doing the perf triage. Looks like the results are on average an improvement - the one concern I have is the very large regression in ripgrep opt. I suppose this is to be expected with LLVM doing more (which is backed up by the detailed perf results which show more time spent in LLVM). I just wanted to make sure that my interpretation is indeed correct, and the regressions we're seeing are both expected and acceptable.

Kobzol · 2023-10-03T14:09:23Z

The regex search runtime benchmark (which is usually quite stable) saw some improvement from this change - https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=5333b878c8bc1c4267a67ea3682663629e47541a&end=2e5a9dd6c9eaa42f0684b4b760bd68fc27cbe51b&stat=instructions:u&tab=runtime. It uses the regex crate (which is also used by ripgrep) internally. I wouldn't make much of it, but could be a hint that indeed regex optimizes slightly better thanks to this.

nikic · 2023-10-03T14:13:53Z

@nikic @InnovativeInventor - I'm doing the perf triage. Looks like the results are on average an improvement - the one concern I have is the very large regression in ripgrep opt. I suppose this is to be expected with LLVM doing more (which is backed up by the detailed perf results which show more time spent in LLVM). I just wanted to make sure that my interpretation is indeed correct, and the regressions we're seeing are both expected and acceptable.

Yes, that's right. As the change allows more inlining, LLVM will spend more time optimizing in some cases, but also producing better code. (Which is why we're seeing improvements on check builds.)

InnovativeInventor · 2023-10-03T14:55:37Z

The regex search runtime benchmark (which is usually quite stable) saw some improvement from this change - https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=5333b878c8bc1c4267a67ea3682663629e47541a&end=2e5a9dd6c9eaa42f0684b4b760bd68fc27cbe51b&stat=instructions:u&tab=runtime. It uses the regex crate (which is also used by ripgrep) internally. I wouldn't make much of it, but could be a hint that indeed regex optimizes slightly better thanks to this.

This is not surprising -- the compiled code output that I was looking at that initially led me to submit this PR was in ripgrep.

…ikic Rebased: Mark drop calls in landing pads cold instead of noinline I noticed that certain inlining optimizations were missing while staring at some compiled code output. I'd like to see this relanded, so I rebased the PR from `@erikdesjardins` (PR rust-lang#94823). This PR reapplies rust-lang#92419, which was reverted in rust-lang#94402 due to rust-lang#94390. Fixes rust-lang#46515, fixes rust-lang#87055. Update: fixes rust-lang#97217.

rust-highfive assigned davidtwco Sep 21, 2022

rustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Sep 21, 2022

rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 21, 2022

rust-highfive assigned nagisa and unassigned davidtwco Sep 21, 2022

erikdesjardins reviewed Sep 22, 2022

View reviewed changes

compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc/src/builder.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

nikic mentioned this pull request Oct 1, 2022

#[inline] on generic functions #102539

Open

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Oct 1, 2022

rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Oct 2, 2022

nagisa added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Oct 28, 2022

nagisa added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Nov 5, 2022

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 Oct 2, 2023

bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Oct 2, 2023

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 Oct 2, 2023

bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Oct 2, 2023

bors merged commit 2e5a9dd into rust-lang:master Oct 2, 2023
12 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.75.0 milestone Oct 2, 2023

RalfJung mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2023

Rust 1.59 rustc greatly increased compile time with include_str! #94390

Open

pvdrz mentioned this pull request Oct 4, 2023

Fix divergence from upstream master ferrocene/ferrocene#23

Merged

ehuss mentioned this pull request Feb 6, 2024

build --release takes forever on latest rust release #119822

Closed

erikdesjardins mentioned this pull request Feb 24, 2024

Heap allocation in Box optimized out with rustc 1.60 but not with 1.61 #98679

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Rebased: Mark drop calls in landing pads cold instead of noinline #102099

Rebased: Mark drop calls in landing pads cold instead of noinline #102099

InnovativeInventor commented Sep 21, 2022 •

edited

Loading

rustbot commented Sep 21, 2022

rust-highfive commented Sep 21, 2022

davidtwco commented Sep 21, 2022

nagisa commented Sep 22, 2022

nikic commented Sep 30, 2022

Kobzol commented Oct 1, 2022

nagisa commented Oct 1, 2022

rust-timer commented Oct 1, 2022

bors commented Oct 1, 2022

lqd commented Oct 1, 2022

nikic commented Oct 1, 2022

lqd commented Oct 1, 2022 •

edited

Loading

bors commented Oct 1, 2022

rust-timer commented Oct 1, 2022

rust-timer commented Oct 2, 2022

nagisa commented Nov 5, 2022

bors commented Oct 2, 2023

bors commented Oct 2, 2023

rust-log-analyzer commented Oct 2, 2023

nikic commented Oct 2, 2023

bors commented Oct 2, 2023

bors commented Oct 2, 2023

rust-timer commented Oct 3, 2023

rylev commented Oct 3, 2023

Kobzol commented Oct 3, 2023

nikic commented Oct 3, 2023

InnovativeInventor commented Oct 3, 2023

Rebased: Mark drop calls in landing pads cold instead of noinline #102099

Rebased: Mark drop calls in landing pads cold instead of noinline #102099

Conversation

InnovativeInventor commented Sep 21, 2022 • edited Loading

rustbot commented Sep 21, 2022

rust-highfive commented Sep 21, 2022

davidtwco commented Sep 21, 2022

nagisa commented Sep 22, 2022

nikic commented Sep 30, 2022

Kobzol commented Oct 1, 2022

nagisa commented Oct 1, 2022

rust-timer commented Oct 1, 2022

bors commented Oct 1, 2022

lqd commented Oct 1, 2022

nikic commented Oct 1, 2022

lqd commented Oct 1, 2022 • edited Loading

bors commented Oct 1, 2022

rust-timer commented Oct 1, 2022

rust-timer commented Oct 2, 2022

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Instruction count

Max RSS (memory usage)

Cycles

Footnotes

nagisa commented Nov 5, 2022

bors commented Oct 2, 2023

bors commented Oct 2, 2023

rust-log-analyzer commented Oct 2, 2023

nikic commented Oct 2, 2023

bors commented Oct 2, 2023

bors commented Oct 2, 2023

rust-timer commented Oct 3, 2023

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Instruction count

Max RSS (memory usage)

Cycles

Binary size

rylev commented Oct 3, 2023

Kobzol commented Oct 3, 2023

nikic commented Oct 3, 2023

InnovativeInventor commented Oct 3, 2023

InnovativeInventor commented Sep 21, 2022 •

edited

Loading

lqd commented Oct 1, 2022 •

edited

Loading