[EXPERIMENTAL] Perf experiments for user-type projection and visiting primary bindings

[Zalathar]

r? ghost
@rustbot experimental

[Zalathar]

@rustbot experimental

[Zalathar]

Don't use the full visit_primary_bindings (which also builds user-type projections) for callers that don't need it:

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 21e5195 with merge 05c0a45...

[Zalathar]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 37d8664 with merge 50cce24...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 50cce24 (50cce24090d8af2e956a039c2211eb857b1e1882)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (50cce24): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - 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

Instruction count

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

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results (secondary 0.3%)

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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.8%	[2.8%, 2.8%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 790.255s -> 789.634s (-0.08%)
Artifact size: 350.01 MiB -> 350.07 MiB (0.02%)

[Zalathar]

Let's try my full overhaul to UserTypeProjections, including what's already in #137123:

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 0db74e2 with merge 1d0df2d...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 1d0df2d (1d0df2d7a57af746f77818258b722d7c4d0ebcd4)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (1d0df2d): 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

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.2%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results (primary 1.9%)

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)	1.9%	[1.4%, 2.4%]	7
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.9%	[1.4%, 2.4%]	7

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 789.735s -> 788.328s (-0.18%)
Artifact size: 350.22 MiB -> 350.12 MiB (-0.03%)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (e799a75): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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

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)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.5%, 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)	1.8%	[1.8%, 1.8%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.8%	[-2.8%, -2.8%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.2%	[-3.2%, -3.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.5%	[-2.8%, 1.8%]	2

Cycles

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 772.938s -> 772.737s (-0.03%)
Artifact size: 360.27 MiB -> 360.26 MiB (-0.00%)

[Zalathar]

Does anything good come from storing THIR pattern nodes in an IndexVec?

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit a8292c6 with merge 3388060...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 3388060 (338806014f390531933ad550f8d9f70ec19a371c)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (3388060): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - 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

Instruction count

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

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results (secondary 2.1%)

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)	2.1%	[1.7%, 2.7%]	7
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 770.825s -> 770.289s (-0.07%)
Artifact size: 359.65 MiB -> 359.65 MiB (-0.00%)

[Zalathar]

Trying the PatId migration once again, but this time with more de-boxing afterwards.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 18826bf with merge 703b52e...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 703b52e (703b52e3ca149a02fbcede8b50d96021f194f244)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (703b52e): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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

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)	0.3%	[0.3%, 0.3%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.3%	[1.3%, 1.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.3%	[0.3%, 0.3%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.4%, secondary -0.9%)

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)	1.5%	[0.4%, 3.9%]	21
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.3%	[0.4%, 3.0%]	14
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.8%	[-2.3%, -0.4%]	104
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.1%	[-2.7%, -0.4%]	147
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-2.3%, 3.9%]	125

Cycles

Results (primary -0.0%, secondary -0.3%)

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)	1.1%	[0.4%, 6.6%]	18
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.9%	[0.4%, 3.9%]	46
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.8%	[-3.0%, -0.4%]	28
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.1%	[-5.5%, -0.4%]	62
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-3.0%, 6.6%]	46

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 770.608s -> 771.553s (0.12%)
Artifact size: 361.97 MiB -> 361.96 MiB (-0.00%)