-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
rustdoc: Make two small cleanups #91073
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
Conversation
Tons of them are constructed, so the size has a big impact on max-rss.
r? @ollie27 (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
r=me with ci passing |
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit a654216 has been approved by |
⌛ Testing commit a654216 with merge cd5db9a407201809f02244061f3c4c597d90c034... |
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
@bors retry looks spurious |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Finished benchmarking commit (02913c0): comparison url. Summary: This change led to very large relevant regressions 😿 in compiler performance.
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression |
I'm going to add back the perf-regression label since this is currently the only way to track these types of spurious regressions. This one is particularly concerning since it's so large. This is only a note for the perf team to look deeper into what happened. No action needs to be taken by the author or reviewer of this PR. @rustbot label: +perf-regression |
No description provided.