Optimize Clippy with PGO

[Kobzol]

View all comments

After rustdoc and Cargo, this seemed like an obvious target for PGO.

Perf results: https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=390279b302ca98ae270f434100ae3730531d1246&end=caf67342a544d6eab7a40ebf0d02e802f62008a4&stat=instructions:u

• Quick try build that doesn't optimize Clippy
• Full try build that optimizes Clippy

[Kobzol]

@bors try

[Kobzol]

@rust-timer queue profiles=Check,Debug,Opt,Doc,Clippy

[rust-bors]

💔 Test for 2dc0eb1 failed: CI. Failed job:

• try - dist-x86_64-linux-quick (web logs, enhanced plaintext logs)

[Kobzol]

@bors try

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 3542ef2 (3542ef25e63b309ca2515102fb81bc590cbabcef)
Base parent: cde3f8a (cde3f8aee5a30928872e2438e3f18238a3fa306c)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (3542ef2): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. Consider adding rollup=never if this change is not fit for rolling up.

@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.1%, secondary -0.8%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	5.8%	[5.8%, 5.8%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.0%	[-4.1%, -2.2%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1

Cycles

Results (primary 2.5%, secondary -3.2%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.2%	[-3.2%, -3.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 486.164s -> 485.416s (-0.15%)
Artifact size: 387.87 MiB -> 387.92 MiB (0.01%)

[Kobzol]

@bors try jobs=dist-x86_64-linux @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 9e8b7aa (9e8b7aa75dfcaaee85081452174dfaf8fb2283aa)
Base parent: b9ee8d8 (b9ee8d8bcb1e4c7905a183a37e6d984c4b9a8468)

[Kobzol]

I forgot to include the Clippy benchmarks 🤦‍♂️

@bors try jobs=dist-x86_64-linux

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 8ea3a55 (8ea3a559cc6c727ccf9b502249495f35c4717a17)
Base parent: 0e72e32 (0e72e3266cdd2fe5a658aff454a778a88e5220a3)

[Kobzol]

@bors try jobs=dist-x86_64-linux,dist-aarch64-linux,dist-x86_64-msvc

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 258fd48 (258fd48308bad33c0f697da8a3d899d50ff55908)
Base parent: 19523e0 (19523e0188270ed9b30336831116acc84adaca3f)

[rustbot]

This PR modifies src/bootstrap/src/core/config.

If appropriate, please update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/utils/change_tracker.rs.

This PR modifies bootstrap.example.toml.

If appropriate, please update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/utils/change_tracker.rs.

[rustbot]

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

rustbot has assigned @Mark-Simulacrum.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

Why was this reviewer chosen?

The reviewer was selected based on:

• Fallback group: @Mark-Simulacrum, @jieyouxu
• @Mark-Simulacrum, @jieyouxu expanded to Mark-Simulacrum, jieyouxu
• Random selection from Mark-Simulacrum, jieyouxu

[rustbot]

This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

[Kobzol]

@bors try jobs=dist-x86_64-linux @rust-timer queue profiles=check,clippy

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 85c3057 (85c3057f0e46dd796a9c246ec887934424d552e1)
Base parent: 9ba81c2 (9ba81c26fe1be0c8730083a1b6da070bc7c51726)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (85c3057): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never rustc-perf
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-5.0%	[-18.8%, -0.8%]	79
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.9%	[-19.5%, -0.4%]	95
All ❌✅ (primary)	-5.0%	[-18.8%, -0.8%]	79

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.3%, secondary -2.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.8%	[0.8%, 0.8%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-4.4%, -0.4%]	76
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.0%	[-3.9%, -0.4%]	112
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-4.4%, 0.8%]	77

Cycles

Results (primary -5.2%, secondary -5.7%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.4%	[0.4%, 6.3%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.8%	[0.4%, 1.7%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-5.4%	[-25.2%, -0.5%]	80
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-6.0%	[-25.6%, -0.4%]	98
All ❌✅ (primary)	-5.2%	[-25.2%, 6.3%]	82

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 455.183s -> 455.618s (0.10%)
Artifact size: 398.99 MiB -> 398.96 MiB (-0.01%)

[Mark-Simulacrum]

@bors r+

[rust-bors]

📌 Commit d77e1e4 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

It is now in the queue for this repository.

🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 10. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened.

Reason for tree closure: Main branch is broken