Add `#[inline]` to `Layout::is_size_align_valid` #149690

RustyYato · 2025-12-05T19:25:07Z

Fixes #149687

r? @saethlin

saethlin · 2025-12-05T19:30:33Z

@bors r+ roll-up=iffy (may perturb perf)

bors · 2025-12-05T19:30:36Z

📌 Commit ae3536e has been approved by saethlin

It is now in the queue for this repository.

saethlin · 2025-12-05T19:31:22Z

@bors rollup=iffy

Yeah I'm on a phone. We really are struggling here aren't we.

matthiaskrgr · 2025-12-05T20:04:06Z

@bors r-

matthiaskrgr · 2025-12-05T20:05:24Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

(since we're waiting anyway..)

Add `#[inline]` to `Layout::is_size_align_valid`

saethlin · 2025-12-05T22:13:27Z

since we're waiting anyway

Hunh?

Oh. The CI failure is hidden. Ugh

rust-bors · 2025-12-05T22:26:16Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: d86c359 (d86c359e479b8a350b9a5dd09229e69fe6502004, parent: 66428d92bec337ed4785d695d0127276a482278c)

rust-timer · 2025-12-06T00:47:05Z

Finished benchmarking commit (d86c359): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text below

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@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)	1.2%	[0.1%, 4.3%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.3%	[0.2%, 2.2%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[0.1%, 4.3%]	4

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.4%, 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)	2.2%	[1.7%, 2.8%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	5.2%	[5.2%, 5.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.0%	[-4.3%, -1.5%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.6%	[-3.6%, -3.6%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-4.3%, 2.8%]	6

Cycles

Results (primary 5.9%, secondary 0.2%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	5.9%	[5.9%, 5.9%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.3%	[2.8%, 3.8%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.0%	[-3.3%, -2.6%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.9%	[5.9%, 5.9%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.0%, secondary 1.0%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.2%]	16
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[0.1%, 2.6%]	21
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.7%, -0.1%]	5
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.0%	[-0.7%, 0.2%]	21

Bootstrap: 470.249s -> 473.304s (0.65%)
Artifact size: 386.85 MiB -> 386.93 MiB (0.02%)

saethlin · 2025-12-06T12:35:21Z

eza's patch now dirties 32 CGUs instead of 16, and the microbenchmarks have an extra CGU. Regressions are as expected, the dubious CGU partitioning is a predictable outcome of compiling an incremental build with some optimized dependencies.

Squash the commits then r=me.

add Alignment::new_unchecked::precondition_check to allowlist

RustyYato · 2025-12-07T01:50:59Z

@bors r=@joboet

bors · 2025-12-07T01:51:01Z

@RustyYato: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers

saethlin · 2025-12-07T01:57:11Z

@bors r+

bors · 2025-12-07T01:57:13Z

📌 Commit 5f9aca7 has been approved by saethlin

It is now in the queue for this repository.

bors · 2025-12-07T13:44:01Z

⌛ Testing commit 5f9aca7 with merge 1d6c526...

bors · 2025-12-07T16:55:00Z

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: saethlin
Pushing 1d6c526 to main...

github-actions · 2025-12-07T16:58:26Z

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing aa30176 (parent) -> 1d6c526 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 12 test diffs

12 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 1d6c526bb010900bc1fd4c45c4ef0307b5150583 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

pr-check-2: 2560.3s -> 2156.0s (-15.8%)
aarch64-gnu-debug: 4534.6s -> 3886.9s (-14.3%)
pr-check-1: 1967.6s -> 1715.0s (-12.8%)
dist-x86_64-apple: 6690.3s -> 7541.4s (+12.7%)
dist-aarch64-llvm-mingw: 5621.7s -> 6335.0s (+12.7%)
i686-gnu-2: 6028.3s -> 5270.3s (-12.6%)
dist-apple-various: 4194.0s -> 3671.0s (-12.5%)
x86_64-gnu-gcc: 3528.4s -> 3104.4s (-12.0%)
x86_64-rust-for-linux: 3051.4s -> 2685.2s (-12.0%)
x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-1: 3579.7s -> 3155.1s (-11.9%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

rust-timer · 2025-12-07T18:16:07Z

Finished benchmarking commit (1d6c526): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text below

Our benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR.
This might be an actual regression, but it can also be just noise.

Next Steps:

If the regression was expected or you think it can be justified,
please write a comment with sufficient written justification, and add
@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged to it, to mark the regression as triaged.
If you think that you know of a way to resolve the regression, try to create
a new PR with a fix for the regression.
If you do not understand the regression or you think that it is just noise,
you can ask the @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance working group for help (members of this group
were already notified of this PR).

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

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)	1.2%	[0.1%, 4.3%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[0.2%, 2.2%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[0.1%, 4.3%]	4

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.9%, secondary -2.8%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.4%	[1.8%, 3.4%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.5%	[-4.8%, -1.6%]	5
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.8%	[-2.8%, -2.8%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-4.8%, 3.4%]	9

Cycles

Results (primary 1.1%, secondary 1.9%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	4.7%	[4.7%, 4.7%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.9%	[1.2%, 2.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.4%	[-2.4%, -2.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.1%	[-2.4%, 4.7%]	2

Binary size

Results (primary -0.0%, secondary 1.0%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.2%]	16
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[0.1%, 2.6%]	21
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.7%, -0.0%]	16
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-0.7%, 0.2%]	32

Bootstrap: 472.025s -> 470.852s (-0.25%)
Artifact size: 388.84 MiB -> 388.93 MiB (0.02%)

rustbot assigned saethlin Dec 5, 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 Dec 5, 2025

bors 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 Dec 5, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Dec 5, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2025

Auto merge of #149690 - RustyYato:inline-layout-helper, r=<try>

d86c359

Add `#[inline]` to `Layout::is_size_align_valid`

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Dec 5, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

RustyYato force-pushed the inline-layout-helper branch from 0972f69 to 7d9f9ad Compare December 5, 2025 20:48

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 Dec 6, 2025

Add #[inline] to Layout::is_size_align_valid

5f9aca7

add Alignment::new_unchecked::precondition_check to allowlist

RustyYato force-pushed the inline-layout-helper branch from 7d9f9ad to 5f9aca7 Compare December 7, 2025 01:47

bors 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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Dec 7, 2025

bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 7, 2025

bors merged commit 1d6c526 into rust-lang:main Dec 7, 2025
12 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.94.0 milestone Dec 7, 2025

RustyYato deleted the inline-layout-helper branch December 7, 2025 18:01

Add #[inline] to Layout::is_size_align_valid #149690

Add #[inline] to Layout::is_size_align_valid #149690

Conversation

RustyYato commented Dec 5, 2025 • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

matthiaskrgr commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

matthiaskrgr commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

saethlin commented Dec 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Dec 6, 2025

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text below

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Dec 6, 2025

Uh oh!

RustyYato commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

saethlin commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Dec 7, 2025

Test differences

Job duration changes

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Dec 7, 2025

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text below

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

Add `#[inline]` to `Layout::is_size_align_valid` #149690

Add `#[inline]` to `Layout::is_size_align_valid` #149690

RustyYato commented Dec 5, 2025 •

edited by rustbot

Loading

saethlin commented Dec 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading