[perf] test MCP510

[lqd]

r? @ghost

[lqd]

Let's see if the bootstrapping cfgs are correctly set up.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[lqd]

Let's see if the bootstrapping cfgs are correctly set up.

$  cargo +4cb98396e9dc17fbe9b0da2b1bd35d9b05fff30c build -q && readelf -p .comment ./target/debug/helloworld

String dump of section '.comment':
  [     0]  GCC: (Ubuntu 11.3.0-1ubuntu1~22.04.1) 11.3.0
  [    2d]  Linker: LLD 16.0.5

Looks like yes?

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (4cb98396e9dc17fbe9b0da2b1bd35d9b05fff30c): 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

Warning ⚠: The following benchmark(s) failed to build:

• rustc

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
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-34.1%	[-74.8%, -0.6%]	31
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-32.7%	[-74.0%, -3.7%]	74
All ❌✅ (primary)	-34.1%	[-74.8%, -0.6%]	31

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)	27.8%	[21.9%, 33.7%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.3%	[2.3%, 2.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	27.8%	[21.9%, 33.7%]	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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-32.3%	[-65.9%, -1.4%]	28
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-28.4%	[-64.8%, -3.3%]	73
All ❌✅ (primary)	-32.3%	[-65.9%, -1.4%]	28

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)	1.6%	[0.6%, 2.4%]	20
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.5%	[0.4%, 1.1%]	61
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-0.4%, -0.1%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.6%	[0.6%, 2.4%]	20

Bootstrap: missing data

[lqd]

The data gathering is done so I'll close this for now, but may reopen to rerun crater on these new try artifacts.

[lqd]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

⌛ Trying commit 87bdb86 with merge 3a76daf…

To cancel the try build, run the command @bors try cancel.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 3a76daf (3a76dafb66c27cfafe00dd63392f1da4fd2db66c, parent: 246733a3d978de41c5b77b8120ba8f41592df9f1)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (3a76daf): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text below

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

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)	0.3%	[0.1%, 0.7%]	39
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.3%	[0.0%, 0.6%]	34
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.3%	[0.1%, 0.7%]	39

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.0%, secondary -2.6%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.0%	[0.6%, 1.3%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.6%	[-2.6%, -2.6%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.0%	[0.6%, 1.3%]	3

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: 469.69s -> 468.76s (-0.20%)
Artifact size: 374.65 MiB -> 374.67 MiB (0.01%)

[lqd]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

⌛ Trying commit 5e73196 with merge 6e523a3…

To cancel the try build, run the command @bors try cancel.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 6e523a3 (6e523a3276b1c3d8adc420d9743167e8a507b450, parent: b56aaec52bc0fa35591a872fb4aac81f606e265c)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (6e523a3): comparison URL.

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

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

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)	0.3%	[0.1%, 2.1%]	37
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.3%	[0.0%, 0.5%]	25
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.2%]	14
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-0.9%, -0.1%]	14
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-0.5%, 2.1%]	51

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.3%, secondary 1.4%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.3%	[0.5%, 3.0%]	13
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.2%	[0.9%, 3.0%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.9%	[-1.9%, -1.9%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.3%	[0.5%, 3.0%]	13

Cycles

Results (secondary 4.8%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.8%	[3.0%, 6.7%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 469.891s -> 471.222s (0.28%)
Artifact size: 374.63 MiB -> 374.82 MiB (0.05%)

[lqd]

bimodal benchmarksssss fuuuuu

[lqd]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

⌛ Trying commit f43fe36 with merge 04b4ec1…

To cancel the try build, run the command @bors try cancel.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 04b4ec1 (04b4ec1d61b32e054b46e00838fa6a8835392a9b, parent: ce5fdd7d42aba9a2925692e11af2bd39cf37798a)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (04b4ec1): comparison URL.

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

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

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)	0.6%	[0.6%, 0.7%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.5%	[0.3%, 1.1%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.2%, -0.1%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.3%, -0.0%]	12
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-0.2%, 0.7%]	8

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 3.8%, secondary 1.6%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	5.7%	[3.1%, 7.3%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.6%	[2.2%, 2.8%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.1%	[-1.1%, -1.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.8%	[-2.2%, 7.3%]	4

Cycles

Results (primary 2.6%, secondary 2.4%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.6%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 466.456s -> 466.534s (0.02%)
Artifact size: 376.58 MiB -> 376.61 MiB (0.01%)