Skip to content

Fix CI for unrolled builds on the try-perf branch#141634

Merged
bors merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
Kobzol:try-perf
May 27, 2025
Merged

Fix CI for unrolled builds on the try-perf branch#141634
bors merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
Kobzol:try-perf

Conversation

@Kobzol
Copy link
Member

@Kobzol Kobzol commented May 27, 2025 •
edited
Loading

That branch is essentially the same as the try branch, it also needs S3 permissions. While at it, I cleaned up secret loading a bit.

Long term, we should move rollup unrolling from rustc-perf to bors, so that we can have only a single try branch.

The AWS Terraform configuration will also have to be changed to provide the secrets (the bors environment) also for the try-perf branch.

r? @marcoieni

@Kobzol
Fix CI for unrolled builds on the try-perf branch
7fae5ef 
That branch is essentially the same as the `try` branch, it also needs S3 permissions.

Long term, we should move rollup unrolling from rustc-perf to bors, so that we can have only a single try branch.
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label May 27, 2025
@Kobzol Kobzol mentioned this pull request May 27, 2025
Closed
32 tasks
@emilyalbini
Copy link
Member

emilyalbini commented May 27, 2025

@bors r+ p=10

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 27, 2025

📌 Commit 7fae5ef has been approved by pietroalbini

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 27, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 27, 2025

⌛ Testing commit 7fae5ef with merge 0fc6f16...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 27, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: pietroalbini
Pushing 0fc6f16 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label May 27, 2025
@bors bors merged commit 0fc6f16 into rust-lang:master May 27, 2025
8 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.89.0 milestone May 27, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 27, 2025

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 d76fe15 (parent) -> 0fc6f16 (this PR)

Test differences

No test diffs found

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 0fc6f1672bdde8163164f10e46d2d9ffcaeb2161 --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: 6108.9s -> 7782.0s (27.4%)
  2. aarch64-apple: 4205.4s -> 5044.7s (20.0%)
  3. aarch64-gnu-debug: 4019.4s -> 4626.9s (15.1%)
  4. x86_64-apple-1: 6457.1s -> 7349.1s (13.8%)
  5. x86_64-apple-2: 5610.8s -> 4855.1s (-13.5%)
  6. dist-x86_64-mingw: 8775.6s -> 7922.9s (-9.7%)
  7. dist-x86_64-apple: 8787.0s -> 9419.9s (7.2%)
  8. dist-x86_64-msvc-alt: 7847.3s -> 7334.5s (-6.5%)
  9. x86_64-gnu-llvm-19-2: 6344.5s -> 5959.1s (-6.1%)
  10. dist-x86_64-netbsd: 5319.4s -> 5040.1s (-5.3%)
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.

@Kobzol Kobzol deleted the try-perf branch May 27, 2025 12:35
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

rust-timer commented May 27, 2025

Finished benchmarking commit (0fc6f16): 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 (secondary 1.7%)

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)		 2.5% [1.4%, 7.1%] 14
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -4.0% [-5.6%, -2.5%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results (secondary -3.7%)

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
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -3.7% [-4.4%, -2.3%] 10
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 779.351s -> 780.158s (0.10%)
Artifact size: 366.34 MiB -> 366.33 MiB (-0.00%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

@marcoieni marcoieni

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.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

1.89.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@Kobzol @emilyalbini @bors @rust-timer @marcoieni @rustbot