Use `&C::Key` less in queries. by nnethercote · Pull Request #153464 · rust-lang/rust

nnethercote · 2026-03-06T02:56:38Z

Currently we use a mix of C::Key and &C::Key parameters. The former is more common and a bit nicer, so convert some of the latter. This results in less converting between the two types, and fewer sigils.

nnethercote · 2026-03-06T03:13:31Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Use `&C::Key` less in queries.

rust-bors · 2026-03-06T05:23:35Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 2abf06c (2abf06ccb2341f2676797960ae2a6174f5c7ce7a, parent: 69370dc4a8862b8401615a2a7b950704ba66c495)

rust-timer · 2026-03-06T06:04:09Z

Finished benchmarking commit (2abf06c): 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
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.4%, secondary 0.6%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.2%	[1.2%, 3.3%]	5
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[0.5%, 3.1%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.9%	[-3.1%, -0.8%]	4
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.2%	[-2.4%, -2.1%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-3.1%, 3.3%]	9

Cycles

Results (primary 0.4%, secondary 3.0%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.0%	[1.9%, 2.2%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.0%	[2.6%, 3.4%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.0%	[-3.0%, -3.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-3.0%, 2.2%]	3

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 482.035s -> 481.544s (-0.10%)
Artifact size: 397.04 MiB -> 395.05 MiB (-0.50%)

rustbot · 2026-03-06T06:15:37Z

r? @JohnTitor

rustbot has assigned @JohnTitor.
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

Why was this reviewer chosen?

The reviewer was selected based on:

Owners of files modified in this PR: compiler, query-system
compiler, query-system expanded to 69 candidates
Random selection from 15 candidates

nnethercote · 2026-03-06T06:15:54Z

r? @Zalathar

@bors rollup

rustbot · 2026-03-06T06:16:01Z

Zalathar is not on the review rotation at the moment.
They may take a while to respond.

nnethercote · 2026-03-07T22:56:33Z

I rebased.

nnethercote · 2026-03-08T00:26:10Z

I extended this a little, so let's make sure it's still perf-neutral.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Use `&C::Key` less in queries.

rust-bors · 2026-03-08T02:35:14Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: f47e635 (f47e6356236da892d981d12ce4cd4fa45d770b48, parent: e370b60cf2b0d3e4b55923ec1558c5b5f8970cfb)

rust-timer · 2026-03-08T03:15:39Z

Finished benchmarking commit (f47e635): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.2%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.2%	[1.0%, 1.5%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[1.0%, 1.5%]	2

Cycles

Results (primary 1.8%, secondary -1.7%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.8%	[1.8%, 1.8%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.7%	[-1.7%, -1.7%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.8%	[1.8%, 1.8%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 485.77s -> 479.714s (-1.25%)
Artifact size: 395.01 MiB -> 397.04 MiB (0.51%)

nnethercote · 2026-03-08T03:20:31Z

Perf-neutral.

@bors rollup

Zalathar · 2026-03-08T11:05:49Z

I wasn't very excited by this as a cleanup, but I guess having key be a non-reference in cache_on_disk_if { ... } makes it net-positive overall.

And if I guess if perf is neutral there's no particular reason to not pass copyable values by value.

r=me after a rebase.

Currently we use a mix of `C::Key` and `&C::Key` parameters. The former is more common and a bit nicer, so convert some of the latter. This results in less converting between the two types, and fewer sigils.

rustbot · 2026-03-08T12:08:02Z

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.

nnethercote · 2026-03-08T12:08:58Z

having key be a non-reference in cache_on_disk_if { ... } makes it net-positive overall.

That was the motivation, along with having all the fns in the query vtable be consistent. And then it spread to a bunch of the plumbing/execution/job functions too.

nnethercote · 2026-03-08T12:09:19Z

I rebased.

@bors r=Zalathar rollup

rust-bors · 2026-03-08T12:09:22Z

📌 Commit face186 has been approved by Zalathar

It is now in the queue for this repository.

Use `&C::Key` less in queries. Currently we use a mix of `C::Key` and `&C::Key` parameters. The former is more common and a bit nicer, so convert some of the latter. This results in less converting between the two types, and fewer sigils.

rust-bors · 2026-03-08T17:55:53Z

⌛ Testing commit face186 with merge 2754da3...

Workflow: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/actions/runs/22826578734

Use `&C::Key` less in queries. Currently we use a mix of `C::Key` and `&C::Key` parameters. The former is more common and a bit nicer, so convert some of the latter. This results in less converting between the two types, and fewer sigils.

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-03-08T18:05:18Z

@bors yield
Yielding to enclosing rollup

rust-bors · 2026-03-08T18:05:21Z

Auto build was cancelled. Cancelled workflows:

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/actions/runs/22826578734

The next pull request likely to be tested is #153576.

…uwer Rollup of 4 pull requests Successful merges: - #153464 (Use `&C::Key` less in queries.) - #153553 (Remove the `rustc_data_structures::assert_matches!` re-exports) - #153561 (Replace the `try_mark_green` hook with direct calls to `tcx.dep_graph`) - #153564 (rendering interpreter OOM as OOM instead of ICE)

Rollup merge of #153464 - nnethercote:less-ref-Key, r=Zalathar Use `&C::Key` less in queries. Currently we use a mix of `C::Key` and `&C::Key` parameters. The former is more common and a bit nicer, so convert some of the latter. This results in less converting between the two types, and fewer sigils.

nnethercote force-pushed the less-ref-Key branch from 1582c75 to b491e74 Compare March 6, 2026 03:02

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2026

Auto merge of #153464 - nnethercote:less-ref-Key, r=<try>

2abf06c

Use `&C::Key` less in queries.

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 6, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 6, 2026

nnethercote marked this pull request as ready for review March 6, 2026 06:15

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Mar 6, 2026

rustbot assigned JohnTitor Mar 6, 2026

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Mar 6, 2026

rustbot assigned Zalathar and unassigned JohnTitor Mar 6, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

nnethercote force-pushed the less-ref-Key branch from b491e74 to 1177d0f Compare March 7, 2026 22:56

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

nnethercote force-pushed the less-ref-Key branch from 1177d0f to 5912445 Compare March 8, 2026 00:25

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2026

Auto merge of #153464 - nnethercote:less-ref-Key, r=<try>

f47e635

Use `&C::Key` less in queries.

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 8, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 8, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Use &C::Key less in queries.

face186

Currently we use a mix of `C::Key` and `&C::Key` parameters. The former is more common and a bit nicer, so convert some of the latter. This results in less converting between the two types, and fewer sigils.

nnethercote force-pushed the less-ref-Key branch from 5912445 to face186 Compare March 8, 2026 12:07

rust-bors bot 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 Mar 8, 2026

JonathanBrouwer mentioned this pull request Mar 8, 2026

Rollup of 3 pull requests #153565

Closed

JonathanBrouwer mentioned this pull request Mar 8, 2026

Rollup of 4 pull requests #153576

Merged

rust-bors bot merged commit 38108e1 into rust-lang:main Mar 8, 2026
11 of 12 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.96.0 milestone Mar 8, 2026

nnethercote deleted the less-ref-Key branch March 8, 2026 22:31

Uh oh!

Conversation

nnethercote commented Mar 6, 2026 • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Mar 6, 2026

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

nnethercote commented Mar 7, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

nnethercote commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Mar 8, 2026

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

Zalathar commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Mar 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

nnethercote commented Mar 6, 2026 •

edited by rustbot

Loading

rust-bors bot commented Mar 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading