-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
experiment: run mono-item collection in check build #122744
Conversation
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Awaiting bors try build completion. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
experiment: run mono-item collection in check build r? `@ghost` This is just to get an upper bound to the perf overhead associated with fixing rust-lang#99682. We could be a bit more clever and only perform collection, not partitioning, or even more clever and do "mentioned items" collection rather than full collection (when rust-lang#122568 lands) -- but for now let's just get a ballpark number.
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
Hm...
It's not quite as easy it seems. |
So the information to do this is simply not present because we don't store the MIR of things in rmeta files, or something like that? To to make this approach work I think we'd have to (a) make "mentioned items" traversal work without full MIR (based on Oli's proposal of a separate query that just returns the mentioned items), and then (b) do a mentioned items traversal of everything (rather than the usual used items traversal) in a check build. |
r? @ghost
This is just to get an upper bound to the perf overhead associated with fixing #99682. We could be a bit more clever and only perform collection, not partitioning, or even more clever and do "mentioned items" collection rather than full collection (when #122568 lands) -- but for now let's just get a ballpark number.