Bump version to 1.73

[Mark-Simulacrum]

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

[Mark-Simulacrum]

@bors r+ rollup=never p=1

[bors]

📌 Commit 8a08a29 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 8a08a29 with merge 03247fb...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing 03247fb to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (03247fb): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - ACTION NEEDED

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

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

Instruction count

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.8%	[0.5%, 1.2%]	32
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.7%	[0.7%, 0.7%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.8%	[0.5%, 1.2%]	32

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.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.1%	[2.1%, 2.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.5%	[-3.2%, -1.9%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

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.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.8%	[1.1%, 5.4%]	8
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.2%	[1.2%, 3.5%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	3.8%	[1.1%, 5.4%]	8

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 655.503s -> 655.53s (0.00%)

[lqd]

Unfortunate, but at least we see some of the noise we can sometimes reach... This has basically returned to normal in #112235 (comment)