Skip to content

Don't explicitly track crate_name getters #85837

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

#

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Don't explicitly track crate_name getters #85837

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

bjorn3
Copy link
Member

@bjorn3 bjorn3 commented May 30, 2021

cc #85804 (comment)

Both require a CrateNum as argument whose identity depends on both the stable crate id and thus also the crate name.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @estebank

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label May 30, 2021
bjorn3
bjorn3 commented May 30, 2021
View reviewed changes
@bjorn3 bjorn3 mentioned this pull request May 30, 2021
Merged
@bjorn3 bjorn3 force-pushed the cstore_refactoring branch from 5f8d114 to d925307 Compare May 30, 2021 17:46
@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

The crate_name can also be made a plain function.

@bjorn3 bjorn3 force-pushed the cstore_refactoring branch from d925307 to 85c523d Compare May 30, 2021 17:51
@bjorn3
Copy link
Member Author

bjorn3 commented May 30, 2021

Huh, it seems that both crate_name and original_crate_name are defined as cdata.root.name for extern crates and as tcx.crate_name for the local crate. Why is there a split between the two?

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

@bjorn3

Why is there a split between the two?

Historical reasons, the original_* variant is a leftover from a past technical debt and can be removed.

@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

I assume this is a historical artefact. #85153 already proposes to drop original_crate_name in favor of the other.

@bjorn3
Copy link
Member Author

bjorn3 commented May 31, 2021

I will wait for that PR to land first then.

@bjorn3 bjorn3 added the S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. label May 31, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 1, 2021

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #85153) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@crlf0710 crlf0710 added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 26, 2021
@crlf0710
Copy link
Member

This seems unblocked now.

@bjorn3 bjorn3 force-pushed the cstore_refactoring branch from 85c523d to 2bd36f8 Compare June 30, 2021 16:31
@bjorn3
Copy link
Member Author

bjorn3 commented Jun 30, 2021

Rebased

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

# to view
@bjorn3 bjorn3 force-pushed the cstore_refactoring branch from 2bd36f8 to 7e0702a Compare June 30, 2021 16:41
@bjorn3
Copy link
Member Author

bjorn3 commented Jul 1, 2021

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jul 1, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 1, 2021

⌛ Trying commit 7e0702a9b0a8325b5d79cc6a86006e27dd862967 with merge be36ebb2d50e265c3c4ea8fad5c6c37c5dd418a6...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 1, 2021

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: be36ebb2d50e265c3c4ea8fad5c6c37c5dd418a6 (be36ebb2d50e265c3c4ea8fad5c6c37c5dd418a6)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued be36ebb2d50e265c3c4ea8fad5c6c37c5dd418a6 with parent 64de497, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking try commit (be36ebb2d50e265c3c4ea8fad5c6c37c5dd418a6): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to significant improvements 🎉 in compiler performance.

  • Moderate improvement in instruction counts (up to -2.6% on full builds of externs-debug)

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying rollup- to bors.

Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up.

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

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Jul 1, 2021
@JohnCSimon JohnCSimon removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jul 18, 2021
@bjorn3 bjorn3 force-pushed the cstore_refactoring branch from 7e0702a to fd72c7f Compare August 8, 2021 10:44
@bjorn3 bjorn3 changed the title Don't explicitly track crate_name and stable_crate_id getters Don't explicitly track crate_name getters Aug 8, 2021
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

# to view
@bjorn3 bjorn3 force-pushed the cstore_refactoring branch from fd72c7f to 4733317 Compare August 8, 2021 10:54
@bjorn3
Copy link
Member Author

bjorn3 commented Aug 8, 2021

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Aug 8, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Aug 8, 2021

⌛ Trying commit 4733317 with merge 3e5d3e8875ba1e9b8e064fd35fd8514aa88e694a...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Aug 8, 2021

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 3e5d3e8875ba1e9b8e064fd35fd8514aa88e694a (3e5d3e8875ba1e9b8e064fd35fd8514aa88e694a)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued 3e5d3e8875ba1e9b8e064fd35fd8514aa88e694a with parent c4c2986, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking try commit (3e5d3e8875ba1e9b8e064fd35fd8514aa88e694a): comparison url.

Summary: This benchmark run did not return any significant changes.

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up.

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

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Aug 8, 2021
@bjorn3
Copy link
Member Author

bjorn3 commented Aug 8, 2021

This is a slight regression.

@bjorn3 bjorn3 closed this Aug 8, 2021
@bjorn3 bjorn3 deleted the cstore_refactoring branch August 8, 2021 14:54
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Reviewers

@cjgillot cjgillot cjgillot left review comments

Assignees

@estebank estebank

Labels
S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.