Skip to content

Conversation

Zalathar
Copy link
Contributor

@Zalathar Zalathar commented Jul 29, 2025

Successful merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

petrochenkov and others added 16 commits July 28, 2025 17:35
Use `splice` to avoid shifting the other items twice.
Put `extern crate std;` first so it's already resolved when we resolve `::std::prelude::rust_20XX`.
This patch also prepares the affected code in `coverage_attr_on` for some
subsequent changes.
…errors

coverage: Treat `#[automatically_derived]` as `#[coverage(off)]`

One of the contributing factors behind rust-lang#141577 (comment) was the presence of derive-macro-generated code containing nested closures.

Coverage instrumentation already has a heuristic for skipping code marked with `#[automatically_derived]` (rust-lang#120185), because derived code is usually not worth instrumenting, and also has a tendency to trigger vexing edge-case bugs in coverage instrumentation or coverage codegen.

However, the existing heuristic only applied to the associated items directly within an auto-derived impl block, and had no effect on closures or nested items within those associated items.

This PR therefore extends the search for `#[coverage(..)]` attributes to also treat `#[automatically_derived]` as an implied `#[coverage(off)]` for the purposes of coverage instrumentation.

---

This change doesn’t rule out an entire category of bugs, because it only affects code that actually uses the auto-derived attribute. But it should reduce the overall chance of edge-case macro span bugs being observed in the wild.
Simplify `align_of_val::<[T]>(…)` → `align_of::<T>()`

I spotted this while working on the inliner (rust-lang#144561).  In particular, if [`Layout::for_value`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/alloc/struct.Layout.html#method.for_value) inlines, then it can be pretty easy to end up with an `align_of_val::<[T]>` today (demo: <https://rust.godbolt.org/z/Tesnscj4a>) where we can save at least a block, if not more, by using the version that's an rvalue and not a call.
…cote

expand: Micro-optimize prelude injection

Use `splice` to avoid shifting the other items twice.
Put `extern crate std;` first so it's already resolved when we resolve `::std::prelude::rust_20XX`.
…r-cast, r=petrochenkov

Account for `.yield` in illegal postfix operator message

Fixes rust-lang#144527
Make resolve_fn_signature responsible for its own rib.

Small simplification in late resolver rib bookkeeping.

r? `@petrochenkov`
Fix typo in `DropGuard` doc

Follows-up rust-lang#144236 (I happened to see the typo yesterday but didn’t think it should delay the PR’s merge so I kept quiet, sorryyyyy).
@rustbot rustbot added A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) 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. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Jul 29, 2025
@Zalathar
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 29, 2025

📌 Commit 7088bf5 has been approved by Zalathar

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 Jul 29, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 29, 2025

⌛ Testing commit 7088bf5 with merge ac0cb05...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 29, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Zalathar
Pushing ac0cb05 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jul 29, 2025
@bors bors merged commit ac0cb05 into rust-lang:master Jul 29, 2025
11 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.90.0 milestone Jul 29, 2025
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Message Perf Build Sha
#144560 coverage: Treat #[automatically_derived] as `#[coverage(o… 941f72863d332601c4fe80a7aaa1f9ddcb8f83e5 (link)
#144566 Simplify align_of_val::<[T]>(…)align_of::<T>() 768f10f22964c8b4e1dfd6461d6e18726d20adce (link)
#144587 expand: Micro-optimize prelude injection 37d0e6d8f7cc3a726e436d3de31740777e480b1c (link)
#144589 Account for .yield in illegal postfix operator message 2e74bb6091ce6c9ab27c24812b51dd0f26cd4dd0 (link)
#144615 Make resolve_fn_signature responsible for its own rib. d9035737988b86458b541969f3d061571c085879 (link)
#144634 Fix typo in DropGuard doc d39d6e71202d3a9817880893abc1d72e6cf6ee11 (link)

previous master: 7278554d82

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

Copy link
Contributor

What is this? This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 7278554 (parent) -> ac0cb05 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 34 test diffs

Stage 1

  • [coverage-map] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#auto: [missing] -> pass (J2)
  • [coverage-map] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#base: [missing] -> pass (J2)
  • [coverage-map] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#on: [missing] -> pass (J2)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#auto: [missing] -> ignore (ignored when the profiler runtime is not available) (J2)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#base: [missing] -> ignore (ignored when the profiler runtime is not available) (J2)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#on: [missing] -> ignore (ignored when the profiler runtime is not available) (J2)
  • [mir-opt] tests/mir-opt/instsimplify/align_of_slice.rs: [missing] -> pass (J2)
  • [mir-opt] tests/mir-opt/pre-codegen/drop_boxed_slice.rs: [missing] -> pass (J2)
  • [ui] tests/ui/coroutine/postfix-yield-after-cast.rs: [missing] -> pass (J2)

Stage 2

  • [coverage-map] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#auto: [missing] -> pass (J0)
  • [coverage-map] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#base: [missing] -> pass (J0)
  • [coverage-map] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#on: [missing] -> pass (J0)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#auto: [missing] -> ignore (ignored when the profiler runtime is not available) (J1)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#base: [missing] -> ignore (ignored when the profiler runtime is not available) (J1)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#on: [missing] -> ignore (ignored when the profiler runtime is not available) (J1)
  • [mir-opt] tests/mir-opt/instsimplify/align_of_slice.rs: [missing] -> pass (J3)
  • [mir-opt] tests/mir-opt/pre-codegen/drop_boxed_slice.rs: [missing] -> pass (J3)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#auto: [missing] -> pass (J4)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#base: [missing] -> pass (J4)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#on: [missing] -> pass (J4)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#auto: [missing] -> ignore (ignored when cross-compiling) (J5)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#base: [missing] -> ignore (ignored when cross-compiling) (J5)
  • [coverage-run] tests/coverage/auto-derived.rs#on: [missing] -> ignore (ignored when cross-compiling) (J5)
  • [ui] tests/ui/coroutine/postfix-yield-after-cast.rs: [missing] -> pass (J6)

Additionally, 10 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Job group index

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard ac0cb05326706ef430a975aa85177e8642f2f457 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

  1. dist-x86_64-apple: 7728.5s -> 12529.8s (62.1%)
  2. dist-aarch64-linux: 9008.5s -> 6008.6s (-33.3%)
  3. dist-aarch64-apple: 7099.4s -> 5110.0s (-28.0%)
  4. x86_64-apple-1: 8346.4s -> 6199.0s (-25.7%)
  5. pr-check-2: 2201.4s -> 2650.0s (20.4%)
  6. x86_64-gnu-llvm-19: 2433.0s -> 2892.8s (18.9%)
  7. i686-gnu-nopt-1: 7277.8s -> 8426.4s (15.8%)
  8. dist-apple-various: 4745.7s -> 4010.4s (-15.5%)
  9. aarch64-gnu-llvm-19-2: 2246.8s -> 2533.3s (12.8%)
  10. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 2580.2s -> 2907.6s (12.7%)
How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (ac0cb05): comparison URL.

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

Our benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR.
This might be an actual regression, but it can also be just noise.

Next Steps:

  • If the regression was expected or you think it can be justified,
    please write a comment with sufficient written justification, and add
    @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged to it, to mark the regression as triaged.
  • If you think that you know of a way to resolve the regression, try to create
    a new PR with a fix for the regression.
  • If you do not understand the regression or you think that it is just noise,
    you can ask the @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance working group for help (members of this group
    were already notified of this PR).

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

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
1.1% [1.1%, 1.1%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.1%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.1% [1.1%, 1.1%] 1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.7%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
1.7% [1.3%, 2.0%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.3% [-1.3%, -1.3%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.7% [-1.3%, 2.0%] 3

Cycles

Results (primary 2.4%, secondary 4.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.4% [2.4%, 2.4%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
4.4% [4.4%, 4.4%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.4% [2.4%, 2.4%] 1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.4% [0.4%, 0.4%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.4% [0.4%, 0.4%] 1

Bootstrap: 467.638s -> 468.868s (0.26%)
Artifact size: 376.88 MiB -> 376.82 MiB (-0.02%)

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression Performance regression. label Jul 29, 2025
@Zalathar Zalathar deleted the rollup-t1yo1jy branch July 29, 2025 22:55
@panstromek
Copy link
Contributor

perf triage:

Looks like a spurious change in image to me. Erases gain from #144543, which was indentified as codegen unit perturbation in #144543 (comment), but this PR goes even furhter, only to return back to previous state in #144718

All these changes are in the backend part of the breakdown graph, so this truly seems like spurious codegen unit shuffling.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Aug 4, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. rollup A PR which is a rollup 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. 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.

10 participants