Get rid of `QueryVTable::call_query_method_fn` by Zalathar · Pull Request #153387 · rust-lang/rust

Zalathar · 2026-03-04T07:51:54Z

Calling the query method to promote a value is equivalent to doing a cache lookup and then calling execute_query_fn, so we can just do that manually instead.

There are two “functional” differences here: If a cache hit occurs, we don't record the hit for self-profiling, and we don't register a read of the dep node. In the context of promotion, which touches all eligible cache entries just before writing the memory-cached values to disk, those two steps should be unnecessary overhead anyway.

r? nnethercote (or compiler)

Zalathar · 2026-03-04T07:52:01Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Get rid of `QueryVTable::call_query_method_fn`

nnethercote · 2026-03-04T09:55:06Z

Seems fine, good to get rid of this fn. r=me once perf results come back ok.

rust-bors · 2026-03-04T10:01:43Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 5bc0460 (5bc04606b33438d872679e82b473662e1bdaefcf, parent: d933cf483edf1605142ac6899ff32536c0ad8b22)

rust-timer · 2026-03-04T10:41:39Z

Finished benchmarking commit (5bc0460): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

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.

@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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.1%]	9
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.1%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.1%]	9

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -5.2%)

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-5.2%	[-5.2%, -5.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results (primary 2.4%, 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)	2.4%	[2.3%, 2.4%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	5.3%	[3.0%, 7.6%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-17.2%	[-17.2%, -17.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.4%	[2.3%, 2.4%]	2

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.1%)

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%, 0.1%]	23
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.1%]	54
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.1%]	23

Bootstrap: 481.183s -> 478.983s (-0.46%)
Artifact size: 394.90 MiB -> 394.84 MiB (-0.02%)

Zalathar · 2026-03-04T10:48:03Z

@bors r=nnethercote

rust-bors · 2026-03-04T10:48:06Z

📌 Commit bab6f12 has been approved by nnethercote

It is now in the queue for this repository.

Calling the query method is equivalent to doing a cache lookup and then calling `execute_query_fn`, so we can just do that manually instead.

rustbot · 2026-03-05T12:37:49Z

This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

Zalathar · 2026-03-05T12:38:38Z

Rebased.

@bors r=nnethercote

rust-bors · 2026-03-05T12:38:41Z

📌 Commit 9012d4e has been approved by nnethercote

It is now in the queue for this repository.

Get rid of `QueryVTable::call_query_method_fn` Calling the query method to promote a value is equivalent to doing a cache lookup and then calling `execute_query_fn`, so we can just do that manually instead. There are two “functional” differences here: If a cache hit occurs, we don't record the hit for self-profiling, and we don't register a read of the dep node. In the context of promotion, which touches *all* eligible cache entries just before writing the memory-cached values to disk, those two steps should be unnecessary overhead anyway. r? nnethercote (or compiler)

rust-bors · 2026-03-07T13:00:15Z

💔 Test for 23fc7dc failed: CI. Failed job:

auto - dist-ohos-aarch64 (web logs, enhanced plaintext logs)

Zalathar · 2026-03-07T13:05:17Z

@bors retry (network errors)

rust-log-analyzer · 2026-03-07T13:07:30Z

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

/dev/sda15      105M  6.2M   99M   6% /boot/efi
tmpfs           1.6G   12K  1.6G   1% /run/user/1001
================================================================================

Sufficient disk space available (94882404KB >= 52428800KB). Skipping cleanup.
##[group]Run src/ci/scripts/setup-environment.sh
src/ci/scripts/setup-environment.sh
shell: /usr/bin/bash --noprofile --norc -e -o pipefail {0}

rust-bors · 2026-03-07T16:15:23Z

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: nnethercote
Duration: 3h 8m 51s
Pushing 085c58f to main...

github-actions · 2026-03-07T16:18:16Z

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 ea5573a (parent) -> 085c58f (this PR)

Test differences

Show 2 test diffs

2 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 085c58f2c0c7db692a2eaf2b8970ff474eed9183 --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: 46m 36s -> 35m 57s (-22.8%)
aarch64-apple: 3h 36m -> 3h 2m (-15.9%)
x86_64-gnu-aux: 2h 20m -> 1h 58m (-15.2%)
pr-check-1: 33m 39s -> 28m 35s (-15.1%)
x86_64-rust-for-linux: 53m -> 45m 8s (-14.8%)
i686-gnu-2: 1h 43m -> 1h 28m (-14.6%)
aarch64-gnu-llvm-20-2: 52m 24s -> 44m 58s (-14.2%)
x86_64-gnu-gcc: 1h 10m -> 1h (-14.1%)
aarch64-msvc-2: 1h 52m -> 1h 37m (-12.9%)
i686-gnu-1: 2h 22m -> 2h 6m (-11.4%)

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 · 2026-03-07T16:57:08Z

Finished benchmarking commit (085c58f): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.2%]	15
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.2%]	5
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.2%]	15

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.4%, secondary 6.3%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.5%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	6.3%	[6.3%, 6.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.5%]	2

Cycles

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

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.1%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.1%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.2%]	9
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.1%]	1

Bootstrap: 480.191s -> 478.289s (-0.40%)
Artifact size: 395.10 MiB -> 395.07 MiB (-0.01%)

…lacrum Remove a flaky `got_timeout` assert from two channel tests In CI, the receiver thread can be descheduled for a surprisingly long time, so there's no guarantee that a timeout actually occurs. One of these tests actually failed in rust-lang#153387 (comment). Earlier failures: - rust-lang#150365 (comment) - rust-lang#147775 (comment) --- - Prior art: rust-lang#152878

rustbot assigned nnethercote Mar 4, 2026