Removes SimplifyComparisonIntegral pass

[dianqk]

r? ghost

[dianqk]

@bors try parent=f57eac1bf98cb5d578e3364b64365ec398c137df @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 19560ab (19560aba9e5ccbe2ecbbf3fe8a9be7590948867f, parent: f57eac1bf98cb5d578e3364b64365ec398c137df)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (19560ab): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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)	0.7%	[0.2%, 2.7%]	16
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.5%	[0.2%, 1.6%]	12
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.7%, -0.2%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.4%	[-0.5%, -0.2%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.5%	[-0.7%, 2.7%]	19

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.3%, 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)	4.6%	[2.6%, 7.6%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-4.1%	[-7.4%, -1.3%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.3%	[-7.4%, 7.6%]	6

Cycles

Results (primary 2.9%, secondary 2.5%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.5%	[2.3%, 3.0%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.4%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.2%	[0.0%, 0.8%]	38
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.6%	[0.0%, 5.0%]	17
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.7%, -0.0%]	6
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.7%	[-0.7%, -0.7%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-0.7%, 0.8%]	44

Bootstrap: 473.812s -> 473.164s (-0.14%)
Artifact size: 391.34 MiB -> 391.20 MiB (-0.04%)

[saethlin]

That is very strange. The breakdown for the biggest check regression just has a bunch of improvements in it.

[mati865]

That is very strange. The breakdown for the biggest check regression just has a bunch of improvements in it.

IIRC, the breakdown and overall stats are two distinct invocations (with and without self-profile). So, for noisy benchmarks you can find situations like this.

[saethlin]

Yes, that's why I commented on the benchmark with a significance factor of 22.

[dianqk]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: d51a4e0 (d51a4e0e80aab2cfdb4d4f594f53fb3166c1e68a, parent: 844f13103a64a898897174b19811b3bfb093dc53)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (d51a4e0): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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)	0.6%	[0.2%, 2.3%]	13
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.4%	[0.1%, 1.3%]	11
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.2%]	7
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.0%]	11
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.3%	[-0.5%, 2.3%]	20

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.9%, secondary 1.6%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	5.8%	[2.0%, 13.2%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.5%	[1.4%, 5.0%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.3%	[-4.0%, -2.9%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.3%	[-3.6%, -1.4%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.9%	[-4.0%, 13.2%]	7

Cycles

Results (primary 2.9%, 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)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.5%	[2.0%, 4.4%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-5.5%	[-9.2%, -2.3%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.4%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.2%	[0.0%, 0.6%]	73
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.4%	[0.0%, 5.0%]	77
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.7%, -0.0%]	12
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-0.7%, -0.0%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-0.7%, 0.6%]	85

Bootstrap: 472.032s -> 472.955s (0.20%)
Artifact size: 383.50 MiB -> 383.42 MiB (-0.02%)