Try to improve into_slice_range inlining#157947
Draft
saethlin wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
Member
Author
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Collaborator
|
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 16, 2026
Try to improve into_slice_range inlining
Collaborator
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
Contributor
Collaborator
|
Queued 6a83d7f with parent 01dfd79, future comparison URL. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a possible solution to #157909. I think the root problem is that LLVM sees the many non-inlinable calls to
slice_index_failand decides that the function must be a bad inlining candidate.The other strategy I was thinking of was to call
try_into_slice_range. I think deduplicating the checking logic in the source between these two functions might just be a good cleanup. But first I'm going to check if this has unexpected perf impact, because I saw mentions ofRangeBoundsin the compiler source.