[PERF] More collect and apply #141652

compiler-errors · 2025-05-27T14:09:37Z

I saw that we have quite a few collect_and_apply calls for N=3-7 (N=7 corresponding to cumulative 99% of nalgebra's calls). Didn't perf locally, but also this is super low-pri, so let's see what rust-timer says.

compiler-errors · 2025-05-27T14:09:43Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

compiler-errors · 2025-05-27T14:09:56Z

compiler/rustc_type_ir/src/interner.rs

@@ -402,6 +402,51 @@ impl<T, R> CollectAndApply<T, R> for T {
                assert!(iter.next().is_none());
                f(&[t0, t1])
            }
+            (3, Some(3)) => {


this could be a macro

[PERF] More collect and apply I saw that we have quite a few `collect_and_apply` calls for N=3-7 (N=7 corresponding to cumulative 99% of nalgebra's calls). Didn't perf locally, but also this is super low-pri, so let's see what rust-timer says.

bors · 2025-05-27T14:10:53Z

⌛ Trying commit 618a3b0 with merge 23b0844...

bors · 2025-05-27T16:19:56Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 23b0844 (23b0844997f3003800cd6bf24365e11d353a5709)

rust-timer · 2025-05-28T02:22:43Z

Finished benchmarking commit (23b0844): comparison URL.

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

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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@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)	3.0%	[3.0%, 3.0%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.6%	[0.1%, 1.3%]	27
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.1%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.1%]	19
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.3%	[-0.2%, 3.0%]	7

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.7%, secondary 4.2%)

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)	1.7%	[1.7%, 1.7%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	6.1%	[1.2%, 9.8%]	10
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.9%	[-2.5%, -1.2%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.7%	[1.7%, 1.7%]	1

Cycles

Results (primary 2.7%, secondary 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)	2.7%	[2.7%, 2.7%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.7%	[1.3%, 3.1%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.7%	[2.7%, 2.7%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary 1.1%)

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

Bootstrap: 780.158s -> 784.918s (0.61%)
Artifact size: 366.33 MiB -> 368.72 MiB (0.65%)

compiler-errors · 2025-05-31T10:08:55Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

bors · 2025-05-31T10:10:05Z

⌛ Trying commit 8180ed0 with merge 4997545...

[PERF] More collect and apply I saw that we have quite a few `collect_and_apply` calls for N=3-7 (N=7 corresponding to cumulative 99% of nalgebra's calls). Didn't perf locally, but also this is super low-pri, so let's see what rust-timer says.

compiler-errors · 2025-05-31T10:32:58Z

compiler/rustc_type_ir/src/interner.rs

+        };
+
+        let Some(t2) = iter.next() else {
+            return f(&[t1]);


bors · 2025-05-31T10:33:05Z

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

compiler-errors · 2025-06-01T17:20:38Z

@bors2 try @rust-timer queue

rust-bors · 2025-06-01T17:20:42Z

⌛ Trying commit e311c75 with merge e582a3d…

[PERF] More collect and apply I saw that we have quite a few `collect_and_apply` calls for N=3-7 (N=7 corresponding to cumulative 99% of nalgebra's calls). Didn't perf locally, but also this is super low-pri, so let's see what rust-timer says.

rust-bors · 2025-06-01T19:45:32Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: e582a3d (e582a3daad87838574e3805e1708c269b5684437)

rust-timer · 2025-06-01T21:24:13Z

Finished benchmarking commit (e582a3d): comparison URL.

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

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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@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)	0.3%	[0.2%, 0.3%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-1.2%, -0.2%]	29
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.8%, secondary 1.8%)

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)	3.3%	[2.2%, 4.2%]	5
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.7%	[0.4%, 9.0%]	27
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-5.5%	[-9.3%, -1.7%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.0%	[-2.1%, -0.4%]	8
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.8%	[-9.3%, 4.2%]	7

Cycles

Results (secondary -0.0%)

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)	0.7%	[0.4%, 1.0%]	10
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.2%	[-2.3%, -0.5%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

Results (secondary -0.8%)

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.8%	[-0.8%, -0.8%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Bootstrap: 775.511s -> 782.887s (0.95%)
Artifact size: 372.29 MiB -> 374.56 MiB (0.61%)

compiler-errors · 2025-06-01T21:27:45Z

compiler/rustc_type_ir/src/interner.rs

@@ -440,6 +454,51 @@ impl<T, R, E> CollectAndApply<T, R> for Result<T, E> {
                assert!(iter.next().is_none());
                f(&[t0, t1])
            }
+            (3, Some(3)) => {


oh shoot i should've changed this too lmao

compiler-errors · 2025-06-02T14:42:09Z

@bors2 try @rust-timer queue

rust-bors · 2025-06-02T14:42:13Z

⌛ Trying commit 42aacf4 with merge c80db40…

[PERF] More collect and apply I saw that we have quite a few `collect_and_apply` calls for N=3-7 (N=7 corresponding to cumulative 99% of nalgebra's calls). Didn't perf locally, but also this is super low-pri, so let's see what rust-timer says.

rust-bors · 2025-06-02T17:06:38Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: c80db40 (c80db4002515430c35018ea3d5c3b3b782f54dd8)

rust-timer · 2025-06-02T21:44:51Z

Finished benchmarking commit (c80db40): 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)	0.3%	[0.3%, 0.3%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.4%, -0.2%]	5
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.6%	[-1.3%, -0.4%]	48
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.4%, -0.2%]	5

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.6%, secondary 0.6%)

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)	1.9%	[0.6%, 10.0%]	12
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.6%	[-1.6%, -1.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.5%	[-5.3%, -0.4%]	5
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.6%	[-1.6%, -1.6%]	1

Cycles

Results (secondary 0.1%)

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)	1.0%	[0.4%, 2.1%]	9
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.0%	[-5.0%, -0.8%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 743.462s -> 749.816s (0.85%)
Artifact size: 372.27 MiB -> 371.77 MiB (-0.13%)

rustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label May 27, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label May 27, 2025

compiler-errors commented May 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels May 28, 2025

compiler-errors force-pushed the more-collect-and-apply branch from 618a3b0 to 8180ed0 Compare May 31, 2025 10:08

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label May 31, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

compiler-errors commented May 31, 2025

View reviewed changes

bors added the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label May 31, 2025

compiler-errors force-pushed the more-collect-and-apply branch from 8180ed0 to e311c75 Compare May 31, 2025 10:34

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jun 1, 2025

compiler-errors commented Jun 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

w

42aacf4

compiler-errors force-pushed the more-collect-and-apply branch from e311c75 to 42aacf4 Compare June 2, 2025 01:31

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jun 2, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. perf-regression Performance regression. labels Jun 2, 2025

[PERF] More collect and apply #141652

Are you sure you want to change the base?

[PERF] More collect and apply #141652

Uh oh!

Conversation

compiler-errors commented May 27, 2025

Uh oh!

compiler-errors commented May 27, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bors commented May 27, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented May 27, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented May 28, 2025

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

Uh oh!

compiler-errors commented May 31, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented May 31, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bors commented May 31, 2025

Uh oh!

compiler-errors commented Jun 1, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented Jun 1, 2025

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Jun 1, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jun 1, 2025

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

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

compiler-errors commented Jun 2, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jun 2, 2025

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Uh oh!

Uh oh!