Skip to content

Use code with reliable branchless code-gen for slice::sort merge #111646

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

Merged

Conversation

Voultapher
Copy link
Contributor

The recent LLVM 16 update changes code-gen to be not branchless anymore, in the slice::sort implementation merge function. This improves performance by 30% for random patterns, restoring the performance to the state with LLVM 15.

Fixes #111559

The recent LLVM 16 update changes code-gen to be not branchless anymore, in the
slice::sort implementation merge function. This improves performance by 30% for
random patterns, restoring the performance to the state with LLVM 15.
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented May 16, 2023

r? @cuviper

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot 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 May 16, 2023
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented May 16, 2023

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with @rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs to tag it appropriately. If this PR contains changes to any unstable APIs please edit the PR description to add a link to the relevant API Change Proposal or create one if you haven't already. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

  • Stabilizing library features
  • Introducing insta-stable changes such as new implementations of existing stable traits on existing stable types
  • Introducing new or changing existing unstable library APIs (excluding permanently unstable features / features without a tracking issue)
  • Changing public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees
  • Changing observable runtime behavior of library APIs

@cuviper
Copy link
Member

cuviper commented May 19, 2023

LGTM, and I also confirmed the perf change locally.

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 19, 2023

📌 Commit 42655ff has been approved by cuviper

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors 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 May 19, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 20, 2023

⌛ Testing commit 42655ff with merge fe76e14...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 21, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: cuviper
Pushing fe76e14 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label May 21, 2023
@bors bors merged commit fe76e14 into rust-lang:master May 21, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.71.0 milestone May 21, 2023
@Voultapher Voultapher deleted the restore-branchless-code-gen-for-merge branch May 21, 2023 08:33
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (fe76e14): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-3.6% [-3.6%, -3.6%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -3.6% [-3.6%, -3.6%] 1

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
4.4% [1.5%, 12.2%] 12
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.3% [-2.3%, -2.3%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.0% [-0.1%, -0.0%] 21
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.0% [-0.1%, -0.0%] 21

Bootstrap: 643.563s -> 645.412s (0.29%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Perf regression with LLVM 16 for slice::sort
5 participants