Optimize hash map operations in the query system

[Zoxc]

This optimizes hash map operations in the query system by explicitly passing hashes and using more optimal operations. find_or_find_insert_slot in particular saves a hash table lookup over entry. It's not yet available in a safe API, but will be in rust-lang/hashbrown#466.

Benchmark	Before	After
	Time	Time	%
🟣 clap:check	1.6189s	1.6129s	-0.37%
🟣 hyper:check	0.2353s	0.2337s	-0.67%
🟣 regex:check	0.9344s	0.9289s	-0.59%
🟣 syn:check	1.4693s	1.4652s	-0.28%
🟣 syntex_syntax:check	5.6606s	5.6439s	-0.30%
Total	9.9185s	9.8846s	-0.34%
Summary	1.0000s	0.9956s	-0.44%

r? @cjgillot

[rustbot]

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

[cjgillot]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 936d8ad with merge d898dc6...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: d898dc6 (d898dc6b90c747dee52de63fccc7f77f86171136)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (d898dc6): 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

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)	0.8%	[0.7%, 0.9%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.3%]	14
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-0.9%, -0.2%]	25
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.3%]	14

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

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)	3.2%	[3.1%, 3.5%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 630.615s -> 639.436s (1.40%)
Artifact size: 317.63 MiB -> 317.09 MiB (-0.17%)

[Zoxc]

This could use another perf run to see if using the sysroot hashbrown crate helps with bootstrap times.

[lqd]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 54d9510 with merge 2a31958...

[oli-obk]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 93bfe39 with merge f0ac6ea...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: f0ac6ea (f0ac6ea50f6a5303bd2a0a3857fe0b901ecb33d6)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (f0ac6ea): 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

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.1%]	14
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.4%, -0.1%]	33
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.1%]	14

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.5%)

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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Cycles

Results (secondary 3.9%)

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)	3.9%	[3.7%, 4.0%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 774.966s -> 774.408s (-0.07%)
Artifact size: 365.53 MiB -> 365.60 MiB (0.02%)

[Zoxc]

The cycle / wall-times are worse, but that may just be noise. We can probably just stick with the crates version.

[Zoxc]

@rustbot ready

[oli-obk]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 93bfe39 has been approved by oli-obk

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 100. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 93bfe39 with merge 90f5eab...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing 90f5eab to master...

[github-actions]

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 b95aac6 (parent) -> 90f5eab (this PR)

Test differences

No test diffs found

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (90f5eab): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.4%, -0.1%]	20
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.3%, -0.1%]	24
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.4%, -0.1%]	20

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 4.1%, secondary 2.9%)

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)	4.1%	[2.2%, 7.5%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	4.1%	[2.2%, 7.5%]	3

Cycles

Results (primary -2.7%)

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)	-2.7%	[-4.5%, -0.6%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.7%	[-4.5%, -0.6%]	6

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 774.916s -> 774.602s (-0.04%)
Artifact size: 365.48 MiB -> 365.58 MiB (0.03%)