Add `#[inline]` to `Layout::is_size_align_valid`

[RustyYato]

Fixes rust-lang/rust#149687

r? @saethlin

[saethlin]

@bors r+ roll-up=iffy (may perturb perf)

[bors]

:pushpin: Commit ae3536e5891dff8d2111ca55d20e3815c2046e9c has been approved by saethlin

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[saethlin]

@bors rollup=iffy

Yeah I'm on a phone. We really are struggling here aren't we.

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job x86_64-gnu-gcc failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

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

test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/non-generic-closures.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/static-init.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/statics-and-consts.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/overloaded-operators.rs ... ok
FATAL: !(missing.is_empty() && unexpected.is_empty() && wrong_cgus.is_empty())
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/opaque-return-impls.rs ... FAILED
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/trait-implementations.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/trait-method-default-impl.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/trait-method-as-argument.rs ... ok
test [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/transitive-drop-glue.rs ... ok
---
---- [codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/opaque-return-impls.rs stdout ----

These items were contained but should not have been:

MONO_ITEM fn std::ptr::Alignment::new_unchecked::precondition_check @@ opaque_return_impls.a116a005f37f8ef5-cgu.0[Internal]



thread '[codegen-units] tests/codegen-units/item-collection/opaque-return-impls.rs' panicked at src/tools/compiletest/src/runtest/codegen_units.rs:111:13:
fatal error

For more information how to resolve CI failures of this job, visit this link.

[matthiaskrgr]

@bors r-

[matthiaskrgr]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

(since we're waiting anyway..)

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[rust-bors[bot]]

:hourglass: Trying commit ae3536e5891dff8d2111ca55d20e3815c2046e9c with merge d86c359e479b8a350b9a5dd09229e69fe6502004…

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

Workflow: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/actions/runs/19974608749

[rust-log-analyzer]

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

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

[TIMING:end] tool::ToolBuild { build_compiler: Compiler { stage: 0, host: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, forced_compiler: false }, target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, tool: "tidy", path: "src/tools/tidy", mode: ToolBootstrap, source_type: InTree, extra_features: [], allow_features: "", cargo_args: [], artifact_kind: Binary } -- 12.253
[TIMING:end] tool::Tidy { compiler: Compiler { stage: 0, host: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, forced_compiler: false }, target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu } -- 0.000
fmt check
Diff in /checkout/tests/codegen-units/item-collection/opaque-return-impls.rs:47:
 //~ MONO_ITEM fn std::alloc::Global::alloc_impl
 //~ MONO_ITEM fn std::boxed::Box::<TestStruct2>::new
 //~ MONO_ITEM fn std::alloc::Layout::from_size_align_unchecked::precondition_check
-//~ MONO_ITEM fn std::ptr::Alignment::new_unchecked::precondition_check 
+//~ MONO_ITEM fn std::ptr::Alignment::new_unchecked::precondition_check
 //~ MONO_ITEM fn std::ptr::NonNull::<T>::new_unchecked::precondition_check
 
 struct Counter {
fmt: checked 6589 files
Bootstrap failed while executing `test src/tools/tidy tidyselftest --extra-checks=py,cpp,js,spellcheck`
Build completed unsuccessfully in 0:00:51

[saethlin]

since we're waiting anyway

Hunh?

Oh. The CI failure is hidden. Ugh

[rust-bors[bot]]

:sunny: Try build successful (CI) Build commit: d86c359e479b8a350b9a5dd09229e69fe6502004 (d86c359e479b8a350b9a5dd09229e69fe6502004, parent: 66428d92bec337ed4785d695d0127276a482278c)

[rust-timer]

Queued d86c359e479b8a350b9a5dd09229e69fe6502004 with parent 66428d92bec337ed4785d695d0127276a482278c, future comparison URL. There is currently 1 preceding artifact in the queue. It will probably take at least ~2.4 hours until the benchmark run finishes.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (d86c359e479b8a350b9a5dd09229e69fe6502004): 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)	1.2%	[0.1%, 4.3%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.3%	[0.2%, 2.2%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[0.1%, 4.3%]	4

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.4%, secondary 0.8%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.2%	[1.7%, 2.8%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	5.2%	[5.2%, 5.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.0%	[-4.3%, -1.5%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.6%	[-3.6%, -3.6%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-4.3%, 2.8%]	6

Cycles

Results (primary 5.9%, secondary 0.2%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	5.9%	[5.9%, 5.9%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.3%	[2.8%, 3.8%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.0%	[-3.3%, -2.6%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.9%	[5.9%, 5.9%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.0%, secondary 1.0%)

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%, 0.2%]	16
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[0.1%, 2.6%]	21
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.7%, -0.1%]	5
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.0%	[-0.7%, 0.2%]	21

Bootstrap: 470.249s -> 473.304s (0.65%) Artifact size: 386.85 MiB -> 386.93 MiB (0.02%)

[saethlin]

eza's patch now dirties 32 CGUs instead of 16, and the microbenchmarks have an extra CGU. Regressions are as expected, the dubious CGU partitioning is a predictable outcome of compiling an incremental build with some optimized dependencies.

Squash the commits then r=me.

[RustyYato]

@bors r=@joboet

[bors]

@RustyYato: :key: Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers

[saethlin]

@bors r+

[bors]

:pushpin: Commit 5f9aca7e74ca901cd6e3fad6dbc6a5a14f160ea1 has been approved by saethlin

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

:hourglass: Testing commit 5f9aca7e74ca901cd6e3fad6dbc6a5a14f160ea1 with merge 1d6c526bb010900bc1fd4c45c4ef0307b5150583...

[bors]

:sunny: Test successful - checks-actions Approved by: saethlin Pushing 1d6c526bb010900bc1fd4c45c4ef0307b5150583 to main...

[github-actions[bot]]

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 aa301763000fd65db235b2d6e4c04da99abf8cd8 (parent) -> 1d6c526bb010900bc1fd4c45c4ef0307b5150583 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 12 test diffs

12 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 1d6c526bb010900bc1fd4c45c4ef0307b5150583 --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. pr-check-2: 2560.3s -> 2156.0s (-15.8%)
2. aarch64-gnu-debug: 4534.6s -> 3886.9s (-14.3%)
3. pr-check-1: 1967.6s -> 1715.0s (-12.8%)
4. dist-x86_64-apple: 6690.3s -> 7541.4s (+12.7%)
5. dist-aarch64-llvm-mingw: 5621.7s -> 6335.0s (+12.7%)
6. i686-gnu-2: 6028.3s -> 5270.3s (-12.6%)
7. dist-apple-various: 4194.0s -> 3671.0s (-12.5%)
8. x86_64-gnu-gcc: 3528.4s -> 3104.4s (-12.0%)
9. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 3051.4s -> 2685.2s (-12.0%)
10. x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-1: 3579.7s -> 3155.1s (-11.9%)

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.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (1d6c526bb010900bc1fd4c45c4ef0307b5150583): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text below

Our benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR. This might be an actual regression, but it can also be just noise.

Next Steps:

• If the regression was expected or you think it can be justified, please write a comment with sufficient written justification, and add @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged to it, to mark the regression as triaged.
• If you think that you know of a way to resolve the regression, try to create a new PR with a fix for the regression.
• If you do not understand the regression or you think that it is just noise, you can ask the @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance working group for help (members of this group were already notified of this PR).

@rustbot label: +perf-regression cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

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)	1.2%	[0.1%, 4.3%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[0.2%, 2.2%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[0.1%, 4.3%]	4

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.9%, secondary -2.8%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.4%	[1.8%, 3.4%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.5%	[-4.8%, -1.6%]	5
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.8%	[-2.8%, -2.8%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-4.8%, 3.4%]	9

Cycles

Results (primary 1.1%, secondary 1.9%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	4.7%	[4.7%, 4.7%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.9%	[1.2%, 2.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.4%	[-2.4%, -2.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.1%	[-2.4%, 4.7%]	2

Binary size

Results (primary -0.0%, secondary 1.0%)

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%, 0.2%]	16
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[0.1%, 2.6%]	21
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.7%, -0.0%]	16
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-0.7%, 0.2%]	32

Bootstrap: 472.025s -> 470.852s (-0.25%) Artifact size: 388.84 MiB -> 388.93 MiB (0.02%)

[panstromek]

perf triage:

Little regression matches pre-merge run, justified by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/149690#issuecomment-3620152210

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged