[dont merge] Revert "Inline a few functions."

[Kobzol]

Reverts #102387

Now that we have LTO for rustc, I want to try if it can make some of the recent "adhoc" #[inline] sprinkling redundant.

This PR had a very nice win and no regressions, so let's see what happens if we revert it with LTO being turned on.

[rust-highfive]

r? @lcnr

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[Kobzol]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit ee995d7 with merge 7ce8c599c552a56995b2e312dc926d58f92f80ee...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 7ce8c599c552a56995b2e312dc926d58f92f80ee (7ce8c599c552a56995b2e312dc926d58f92f80ee)

[rust-timer]

Queued 7ce8c599c552a56995b2e312dc926d58f92f80ee with parent 56f1325, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (7ce8c599c552a56995b2e312dc926d58f92f80ee): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-0.6%, -0.5%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.3%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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.

	mean1	range	count2
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.7%	[4.6%, 4.8%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.6%	[-2.8%, -2.5%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

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

Footnotes

1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩²

2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩²

[Kobzol]

Nevermind the improvements, the previous tt-muncher wins have not turned into regressions, which is a subtle hint that maybe LTO was able to do this. That's good news I guess, although there have been many changes to the compiler in the meantime, so it's not clear that this is the case.

I don't think that this should be merged, but anyway CCing @nnethercote.

[nnethercote]

Given that LTO for rustc is Linux only, we should definitely not land this. But it's an interesting experiment nonetheless!

[Kobzol]

I agree. Closing.