Remove dead instructions in terminate blocks

[Mark-Simulacrum]

Terminate blocks look pretty in the IR I've looked at, so no actual perf delta from this. But it seems reasonable to note produce unused IR.

[Mark-Simulacrum]

@bors2 try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

⌛ Trying commit a46ef2d with merge e688330…

To cancel the try build, run the command @bors2 try cancel.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: e688330 (e688330f9b59aa0229fd4de423dc2354b85bbb98, parent: a30f1783fe136d92545423dd30b12eb619973cdb)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (e688330): 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)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.5%, secondary -3.1%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.5%	[-2.5%, -2.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.1%	[-3.6%, -2.5%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.5%	[-2.5%, -2.5%]	1

Cycles

Results (primary 3.1%, secondary 2.2%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.1%	[3.1%, 3.1%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.2%	[2.1%, 2.4%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.1%	[3.1%, 3.1%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary 1.1%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.1%	[1.1%, 1.1%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.1%	[1.1%, 1.1%]	1

Bootstrap: 689.082s -> 691.002s (0.28%)
Artifact size: 371.89 MiB -> 371.92 MiB (0.01%)

[rustbot]

r? @WaffleLapkin

rustbot has assigned @WaffleLapkin.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc

cc @antoyo, @GuillaumeGomez

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_ssa

cc @WaffleLapkin

[Mark-Simulacrum]

Regressions look spurious to me based on history of that benchmark.

[WaffleLapkin]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit a46ef2d has been approved by WaffleLapkin

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[workingjubilee]

forcing rollup=never drain:

@bors p=5

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit a46ef2d with merge d14d202...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: WaffleLapkin
Pushing d14d202 to master...

[github-actions]

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 8cf5fad (parent) -> d14d202 (this PR)

Test differences

No test diffs found

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard d14d202262d13df896b0c624b0cec6e4bfde631a --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

1. dist-aarch64-linux: 6040.3s -> 7923.6s (31.2%)
2. dist-apple-various: 8577.7s -> 7254.0s (-15.4%)
3. x86_64-apple-1: 6787.1s -> 7641.1s (12.6%)
4. dist-x86_64-apple: 8889.9s -> 7812.6s (-12.1%)
5. x86_64-apple-2: 4321.1s -> 3909.6s (-9.5%)
6. aarch64-gnu-debug: 3993.9s -> 3662.4s (-8.3%)
7. dist-i686-msvc: 6866.3s -> 7377.3s (7.4%)
8. dist-s390x-linux: 5071.8s -> 4701.4s (-7.3%)
9. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 2673.8s -> 2487.9s (-7.0%)
10. aarch64-apple: 5378.7s -> 5006.3s (-6.9%)

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.