Don't use a thread to load the dep graph by Zoxc · Pull Request #116109 · rust-l...
source link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116109
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
Don't use a thread to load the dep graph #116109
Conversation
Contributor
This removes the use of a thread to load the dep graph. It's not currently useful as we immediately block on it.
r? @oli-obk
added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
labels
Contributor
This comment has been minimized.
added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label
Contributor
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
This comment has been minimized.
Collaborator
|
Finished benchmarking commit (b2bb63f): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action neededBenchmarking 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 Instruction countThis is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 632.116s -> 631.38s (-0.12%) |
removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label
Contributor
|
@bors r+ |
added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
labels
Contributor
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Collaborator
|
Finished benchmarking commit (8bf0dec): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDEDNext Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression Instruction countThis is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 631.717s -> 631.784s (0.01%) |
let res = sess.opts.build_dep_graph().then(|| load_dep_graph(sess)); |
||
if sess.opts.incremental.is_some() { |
||
sess.time("incr_comp_garbage_collect_session_directories", || { |
Contributor
Author
There does seem to be a small performance hit which is probably this no longer being done in parallel.
Contributor
looks like noise to me on the graph of the regressed perf tests
Contributor
Author
It does look like the time incr_comp_garbage_collect_session_directories takes in practice is quite small, so it's probably just noise.
Member
Contributor
Author
I was referring to the wall time regression in the initial perf run. The instruction count isn't very useful as this PR involves parallelism.
added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
None yet
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK