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.

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

read_volatile __rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable in alloc_zeroed #130497

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 18, 2024

Conversation

saethlin
Copy link
Member

@saethlin saethlin commented Sep 18, 2024

It was pointed out in #128854 (comment) that the magic volatile read was probably missing from alloc_zeroed. I can't find any mention of alloc_zeroed on #86844, so it looks like this was just missed initially.

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Sep 18, 2024
@saethlin
Copy link
Member Author

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Sep 18, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 18, 2024

⌛ Trying commit 4676144 with merge e72f848...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 18, 2024
…=<try>

read_volatile __rust_no_alloc_shim_is_unstable in alloc_zeroed

rust-lang#128854 (comment)

r? `@ghost`
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 18, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: e72f848 (e72f8484040362cd7db7b6ee18d387e94e1b8d38)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (e72f848): 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-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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.3% [0.3%, 0.3%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.5% [-0.7%, -0.4%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.2% [-0.7%, 0.3%] 3

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.4%, secondary 1.8%)

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)
3.4% [1.4%, 4.7%] 5
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
3.7% [3.3%, 4.0%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.3% [-2.3%, -2.3%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.8% [-1.8%, -1.8%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.4% [-2.3%, 4.7%] 6

Cycles

Results (primary -0.9%, 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% [2.0%, 2.1%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.9% [-0.9%, -0.9%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.9% [-0.9%, -0.9%] 1

Binary size

Results (primary -0.0%, secondary 0.1%)

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)
0.1% [0.0%, 0.2%] 14
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.0%, 0.3%] 14
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.2% [-0.2%, -0.1%] 7
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.1%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.0% [-0.2%, 0.2%] 21

Bootstrap: 767.556s -> 767.346s (-0.03%)
Artifact size: 341.28 MiB -> 341.23 MiB (-0.02%)

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Sep 18, 2024
@saethlin
Copy link
Member Author

r? @bjorn3

@saethlin saethlin marked this pull request as ready for review September 18, 2024 12:22
@bjorn3
Copy link
Member

bjorn3 commented Sep 18, 2024

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 18, 2024

📌 Commit 4676144 has been approved by bjorn3

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 Sep 18, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 18, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 4676144 with merge 7fc70f8...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 18, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: bjorn3
Pushing 7fc70f8 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Sep 18, 2024
@bors bors merged commit 7fc70f8 into rust-lang:master Sep 18, 2024
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.83.0 milestone Sep 18, 2024
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (7fc70f8): 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)
0.5% [0.5%, 0.5%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.5% [-0.7%, -0.3%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.2% [-0.7%, 0.5%] 3

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.7%, secondary -0.2%)

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)
3.5% [1.4%, 5.0%] 6
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.2% [2.2%, 2.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.2% [-2.2%, -2.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.7% [-2.7%, -2.7%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.7% [-2.2%, 5.0%] 7

Cycles

Results (primary -0.8%, secondary -3.4%)

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)
2.0% [2.0%, 2.0%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.8% [-0.8%, -0.8%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-5.6% [-8.3%, -2.5%] 5
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.8% [-0.8%, -0.8%] 1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.0%, secondary 0.1%)

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)
0.1% [0.0%, 0.2%] 12
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.0%, 0.3%] 14
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.2% [-0.2%, -0.1%] 7
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.1%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.0% [-0.2%, 0.2%] 19

Bootstrap: 765.7s -> 768.056s (0.31%)
Artifact size: 341.29 MiB -> 341.27 MiB (-0.01%)

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

  • cranelift-codegen opt-full-llvm regressed by -0.48%.
  • marking as triaged; this is bringing the two allocator paths into consistency with eachother (the question of whether we want these volatile reads at all, and how to otherwise achieve their effect on the end-to-end developer ex
    perience, is an entirely separate question).

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Sep 23, 2024
@saethlin saethlin deleted the alloc-zeroed-is-unstable branch September 23, 2024 15:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants