Default: Always inline primitive data types.

[Jerrody]

No description provided.

[rustbot]

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @thomcc (or someone else) soon.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information. Namely, in order to ensure the minimum review times lag, PR authors and assigned reviewers should ensure that the review label (S-waiting-on-review and S-waiting-on-author) stays updated, invoking these commands when appropriate:

• @rustbot author: the review is finished, PR author should check the comments and take action accordingly
• @rustbot review: the author is ready for a review, this PR will be queued again in the reviewer's queue

[thomcc]

Seems fine. Lets make sure this doesn't have a weird perf impact though.
@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit bb33730 with merge 3d8aa52723922196847cd5199e395167cd536190...

[Jerrody]

Seems fine. Lets make sure this doesn't have a weird perf impact though. @bors try @rust-timer queue

It shouldn't have I expect improvements. But yes, it's better to check.

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 3d8aa52723922196847cd5199e395167cd536190 (3d8aa52723922196847cd5199e395167cd536190)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (3d8aa52723922196847cd5199e395167cd536190): 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 a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.6%	[0.5%, 0.6%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[1.0%, 1.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.6%	[0.5%, 0.6%]	2

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)	5.3%	[5.3%, 5.3%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.5%	[-2.5%, -2.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.5%	[-3.5%, -3.5%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.4%	[-2.5%, 5.3%]	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)	3.6%	[3.3%, 3.8%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.2%	[-4.8%, -1.1%]	8
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.6%	[-1.6%, -1.6%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-3.2%	[-4.8%, -1.1%]	8

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)	0.3%	[0.0%, 0.5%]	7
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-0.1%, -0.0%]	27
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.0%	[-0.1%, 0.5%]	34

Bootstrap: 663.05s -> 661.072s (-0.30%)

[Jerrody]

Wow, interesting result. What the reason?

[lukas-code]

Looks like the usual perf noise, nothing to worry about. The dip in instruction count is #112476 (comment) and now it's gone back up.

[thomcc]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit bb33730 has been approved by thomcc

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit bb33730 with merge 25b5af1...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: thomcc
Pushing 25b5af1 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (25b5af1): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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)	0.9%	[0.5%, 1.2%]	10
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.9%	[0.5%, 1.2%]	10

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)	0.8%	[0.8%, 0.8%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.6%	[2.4%, 2.8%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-4.6%	[-4.6%, -4.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.9%	[-4.6%, 0.8%]	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)	5.1%	[1.3%, 6.7%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

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)	0.3%	[0.0%, 0.5%]	8
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-0.1%, -0.0%]	26
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.0%	[-0.1%, 0.5%]	34

Bootstrap: 662.496s -> 661.549s (-0.14%)

[Mark-Simulacrum]

See #113024 (comment) - dropping regression label.