-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
Upgrade to measureme 9.0.0 #77398
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
Upgrade to measureme 9.0.0 #77398
Conversation
I'm pretty sure we can ignore the ap stuff, the duplicate dep there doesn't really matter too much. I imagine the best bet is to deploy this on perf like we did with 0.7, where we run both and whichever works works? One additional bit might be that perf is actually depending on measureme directly these days for the in-browser rendering, so that might complicate things somewhat. I can see a couple solutions:
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion |
⌛ Trying commit 4e8813fd9ef61348937d3d8cf0523240c96c3988 with merge 87affc7df6cfd30178b8d76557e59bfa505f602f... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions, checks-azure |
Queued 87affc7df6cfd30178b8d76557e59bfa505f602f with parent 738d4a7, future comparison URL. |
Marking this as a draft since we have another |
Finished benchmarking try commit (87affc7df6cfd30178b8d76557e59bfa505f602f): comparison url. Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up. @bors rollup=never |
4e8813f
to
567c575
Compare
567c575
to
edae23a
Compare
This is ready for review.
That seems ok to me. We typically don't make that many breaking changes to the on-disk format anymore. I think the last one was about 9 months ago. |
@bors try @rust-timer queue include=helloworld Just a quick try for a single benchmark, no need to do a full collection. |
Awaiting bors try build completion |
⌛ Trying commit edae23a8f50c90337ea93ba39a808e4a035a5cac with merge 87781d93a3879c9931bdafd98741f3a1d2c02191... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions, checks-azure |
Queued 87781d93a3879c9931bdafd98741f3a1d2c02191 with parent b5c9e24, future comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking try commit (87781d93a3879c9931bdafd98741f3a1d2c02191): comparison url. Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up. @bors rollup=never |
@bors treeclosed- |
⌛ Testing commit d84daa1a04f0d927b20caa60bbaab82e2856b3e4 with merge 427c4ae4ddf69632281f399566a64c6bab003f94... |
💥 Test timed out |
The job Click to expand the log.
I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
@bors retry |
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #78334) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. Note that reviewers usually do not review pull requests until merge conflicts are resolved! Once you resolve the conflicts, you should change the labels applied by bors to indicate that your PR is ready for review. Post this as a comment to change the labels:
|
d84daa1
to
5ac5556
Compare
@bors r=Mark-Simulacrum |
📌 Commit 5ac5556 has been approved by |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
@Mark-Simulacrum Thanks for getting the perf.rlo side of this working so we could land it! |
I believe I did this correctly but there's still a reference to
[email protected]
coming fromrustc-ap-rustc_data_structures
and I'm not sure how to resolve that.r? @Mark-Simulacrum
We'll also need to deploy the new version of the tools on perf.rlo.