faster charsearcher #141808

bend-n · 2025-05-31T09:49:13Z

attempt to do #141516 better
minor improvements to #82471

bors · 2025-05-31T12:30:20Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #141678) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

workingjubilee · 2025-05-31T15:33:27Z

@bors2 @rust-timer queue

rust-bors · 2025-05-31T15:33:30Z

Missing command.

mati865 · 2025-05-31T15:34:52Z

Maybe bors2 still needs try?

workingjubilee · 2025-05-31T16:04:29Z

er.

@bors2 try @rust-timer queue

… r=<try> faster charsearcher attempt to do #141516 better resolves #82471 r? `@workingjubilee`

library/core/src/str/pattern.rs

rust-timer · 2025-05-31T23:18:27Z

Finished benchmarking commit (c0dc3e0): 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)	0.7%	[0.3%, 1.6%]	20
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.9%	[0.2%, 1.6%]	21
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-2.1%, -2.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.4%	[-0.5%, -0.3%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-2.1%, 1.6%]	22

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.2%, secondary -1.9%)

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)	2.7%	[2.6%, 2.8%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.6%	[0.4%, 0.7%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.7%	[-3.9%, -3.5%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.4%	[-4.4%, -0.5%]	10
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.2%	[-3.9%, 2.8%]	5

Cycles

Results (primary -2.1%, secondary -0.5%)

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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[0.5%, 2.0%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.1%	[-2.2%, -2.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.0%	[-7.0%, -0.5%]	8
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.1%	[-2.2%, -2.0%]	2

Binary size

Results (primary 0.0%, secondary 0.2%)

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)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.2%]	19
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	39
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.8%, -0.0%]	9
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.0%	[-0.8%, 0.2%]	28

Bootstrap: 776.294s -> 776.026s (-0.03%)
Artifact size: 372.28 MiB -> 372.24 MiB (-0.01%)

Noratrieb · 2025-06-01T14:36:21Z

I ran the profile_local command that can be found in the details of the serde benchmark:

< 111,439,668  ???:
   52,308,894    rustc_resolve::rustdoc::add_doc_fragment
   50,266,584    rustc_resolve::rustdoc::unindent_doc_fragments
   26,014,579    rustc_resolve::rustdoc::prepare_to_doc_link_resolution
  -15,577,398    core::slice::memchr::memchr_aligned
    2,875,349    <core::str::pattern::CharSearcher as core::str::pattern::Searcher>::next_match
   -2,437,181    <hashbrown::raw::RawTable<(rustc_span::def_id::DefId, (rustc_middle::query::erase::Erased<[u8; 20]>, rustc_query_system::dep_graph::graph::DepNodeIndex))>>::reserve_rehash::<rustc_data_structures::sharded::table_entry<rustc_span::def_id::DefId, (rustc_middle::query::erase::Erased<[u8; 20]>, rustc_query_system::dep_graph::graph::DepNodeIndex), rustc_span::def_id::DefId>::{closure#1}>
    2,437,151    <hashbrown::raw::RawTable<(rustc_middle::ty::Ty, (rustc_middle::query::erase::Erased<[u8; 16]>, rustc_query_system::dep_graph::graph::DepNodeIndex))>>::reserve_rehash::<rustc_data_structures::sharded::table_entry<rustc_middle::ty::Ty, (rustc_middle::query::erase::Erased<[u8; 16]>, rustc_query_system::dep_graph::graph::DepNodeIndex), rustc_middle::ty::Ty>::{closure#1}>
   -1,455,979    __memcpy_avx_unaligned_erms
   -1,310,908    <rustdoc::html::highlight::Classifier>::advance::{closure#1}
     -709,313    __memcmp_avx2_movbe

it looks like docs processing might actually use this function (I haven't verified this) and in that case it might have gotten slower...

workingjubilee · 2025-06-02T20:49:11Z

@bend-n I don't know if this will be enough to run the perf queue, but at least this way you can create artifacts for a build without asking.

@bors2 delegate=try

rust-bors · 2025-06-02T20:49:14Z

@bend-n can now perform try builds on this pull request

workingjubilee · 2025-06-02T20:49:46Z

@bors2 try

rust-bors · 2025-06-02T20:49:50Z

⌛ Trying commit e65ed1f with merge ef13fec…

… r=<try> faster charsearcher attempt to do #141516 better resolves #82471 r? `@workingjubilee`

workingjubilee · 2025-06-02T20:56:23Z

@rust-timer queue

rust-timer · 2025-06-03T09:36:15Z

Finished benchmarking commit (ef13fec): 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)	1.3%	[0.4%, 3.0%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.3%	[0.2%, 0.4%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-2.2%, 3.0%]	4

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.5%, secondary -0.3%)

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)	4.9%	[3.4%, 6.4%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.8%	[0.4%, 1.3%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-5.9%	[-9.8%, -2.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.7%	[-5.9%, -0.4%]	5
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.5%	[-9.8%, 6.4%]	4

Cycles

Results (primary 0.4%, secondary 0.9%)

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)	3.0%	[3.0%, 3.0%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.9%	[0.5%, 5.2%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.3%	[-2.3%, -2.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.5%]	5
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-2.3%, 3.0%]	2

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.2%)

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)	0.2%	[0.1%, 1.2%]	21
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.2%	[0.1%, 0.6%]	41
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.8%, -0.0%]	7
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.0%	[-0.0%, -0.0%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-0.8%, 1.2%]	28

Bootstrap: 744.828s -> 746.22s (0.19%)
Artifact size: 372.28 MiB -> 372.31 MiB (0.01%)

bend-n · 2025-06-03T12:08:36Z

well now serde is kinda fine but.... what happened to clap

bend-n · 2025-06-03T17:30:17Z

@bors2 try

rust-bors · 2025-06-03T17:30:21Z

⌛ Trying commit 3d33877 with merge e5df514…

To cancel the try build, run the command @bors2 try cancel.

… r=<try> faster charsearcher attempt to do #141516 better resolves #82471 r? `@workingjubilee`

workingjubilee · 2025-06-03T18:42:13Z

@rust-timer queue

rust-bors · 2025-06-03T20:01:13Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: e5df514 (e5df5145167c71d8a94455b73e1e395873b6e16d)

rust-timer · 2025-06-04T04:51:44Z

Finished benchmarking commit (e5df514): 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)	-2.4%	[-2.8%, -1.9%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.4%	[-2.8%, -1.9%]	2

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 3.4%, 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)	3.4%	[2.2%, 4.6%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.9%	[2.7%, 3.3%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-7.6%	[-7.6%, -7.6%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.4%	[2.2%, 4.6%]	2

Cycles

Results (primary -2.0%, secondary -0.7%)

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)	0.9%	[0.9%, 0.9%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-2.3%, -1.7%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.3%	[-2.3%, -2.3%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-2.3%, -1.7%]	2

Binary size

Results (primary -0.0%, 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)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.2%]	15
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.3%]	38
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-1.1%, -0.0%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-1.1%, 0.2%]	21

Bootstrap: 745.073s -> 746.827s (0.24%)
Artifact size: 372.30 MiB -> 372.37 MiB (0.02%)

bend-n · 2025-06-04T06:38:07Z

@bors2 try

more #[inline] might have significant regressions

rust-bors · 2025-06-04T06:38:10Z

⌛ Trying commit 99e141c with merge bd36a7c…

To cancel the try build, run the command @bors2 try cancel.

… r=<try> faster charsearcher attempt to do #141516 better resolves #82471 r? `@workingjubilee`

workingjubilee · 2025-06-04T07:24:11Z

hmm.

@rust-timer queue

rust-bors · 2025-06-04T09:07:21Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: bd36a7c (bd36a7c3b161895c261814889d29a9d346d07b1f)

rust-timer · 2025-06-04T15:23:54Z

Finished benchmarking commit (bd36a7c): 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)	0.7%	[0.3%, 1.5%]	8
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.7%	[0.4%, 1.6%]	5
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-2.0%, -0.3%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.7%	[-1.5%, -0.2%]	10
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.2%	[-2.0%, 1.5%]	11

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.5%, secondary 4.4%)

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)	3.4%	[2.6%, 4.1%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.4%	[2.0%, 6.2%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.3%	[-2.3%, -2.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.5%	[-2.3%, 4.1%]	3

Cycles

Results (primary -0.1%, secondary 1.7%)

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)	1.6%	[1.6%, 1.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.7%	[0.7%, 2.5%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.7%	[-1.7%, -1.7%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-1.7%, 1.6%]	2

Binary size

Results (primary 0.2%, secondary 0.3%)

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)	0.2%	[0.0%, 0.5%]	42
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.3%	[0.0%, 0.8%]	52
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.7%, -0.0%]	4
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.2%	[-0.7%, 0.5%]	46

Bootstrap: 745.447s -> 748.472s (0.41%)
Artifact size: 372.35 MiB -> 372.45 MiB (0.03%)

bend-n · 2025-06-04T15:26:40Z

yeah that makes sense. if i dont have the inlines, its a minor improvement of
1.6s -> 1.1s, but it doesnt actually solve the issue.

workingjubilee · 2025-06-04T19:20:25Z

library/core/src/str/iter.rs

@@ -656,7 +656,7 @@ impl<'a, P: Pattern> SplitInternal<'a, P> {
        None
    }

-    #[inline]
+    #[inline(always)]


maybe we should back out the inline(always) and trust LLVM to make the right decision once we've emitted the inline hint at all?

well thats what i was checking out with commit 99e141c because otherwise it doesnt inline and still isnt nearly as good as the position based one

there are minor improvements without it, but im not sure its worth doing given it doesnt fix the issue completely

This reverts commit 99e141c.

rustbot assigned workingjubilee May 31, 2025

rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels May 31, 2025

bend-n force-pushed the faster_charsearcher_take2_with_memchr branch from c210227 to 37ba052 Compare May 31, 2025 13:10

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

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request May 31, 2025

Auto merge of #141808 - bend-n:faster_charsearcher_take2_with_memchr,…

c0dc3e0

… r=<try> faster charsearcher attempt to do #141516 better resolves #82471 r? `@workingjubilee`

osiewicz reviewed May 31, 2025

View reviewed changes

library/core/src/str/pattern.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

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 31, 2025

faster charsearcher

e65ed1f

bend-n force-pushed the faster_charsearcher_take2_with_memchr branch from 37ba052 to e65ed1f Compare June 2, 2025 13:24

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 2, 2025

Auto merge of #141808 - bend-n:faster_charsearcher_take2_with_memchr,…

ef13fec

… r=<try> faster charsearcher attempt to do #141516 better resolves #82471 r? `@workingjubilee`

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 3, 2025

dont ever position()

3d33877

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 3, 2025

Auto merge of #141808 - bend-n:faster_charsearcher_take2_with_memchr,…

e5df514

… r=<try> faster charsearcher attempt to do #141516 better resolves #82471 r? `@workingjubilee`

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 3, 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 4, 2025

add more inline

99e141c

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 4, 2025

Auto merge of #141808 - bend-n:faster_charsearcher_take2_with_memchr,…

bd36a7c

… r=<try> faster charsearcher attempt to do #141516 better resolves #82471 r? `@workingjubilee`

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 4, 2025

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 Jun 4, 2025

workingjubilee reviewed Jun 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

Revert "add more inline"

5d60566

This reverts commit 99e141c.

faster charsearcher #141808

Are you sure you want to change the base?

faster charsearcher #141808

Conversation

bend-n commented May 31, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bors commented May 31, 2025

Uh oh!

workingjubilee commented May 31, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented May 31, 2025

Uh oh!

mati865 commented May 31, 2025

Uh oh!

workingjubilee commented May 31, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented May 31, 2025

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

Uh oh!

Noratrieb commented Jun 1, 2025

Uh oh!

workingjubilee commented Jun 2, 2025

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Uh oh!

workingjubilee commented Jun 2, 2025

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Uh oh!

workingjubilee commented Jun 2, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jun 3, 2025

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

Uh oh!

bend-n commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

bend-n commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

workingjubilee commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jun 4, 2025

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Uh oh!

bend-n commented Jun 4, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

workingjubilee commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Jun 4, 2025

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

Uh oh!

bend-n commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bend-n commented May 31, 2025 •

edited

Loading

bend-n commented Jun 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading