Skip to content

Conversation

@dianqk
Copy link
Member

@dianqk dianqk commented Dec 29, 2025

Fixes #141313. This is a more principled fix than #147886.

Using a reference that is not a borrowing of an SSA local at a new location may be UB.

The PR has two major changes.

The first one, when introducing a new dereference at a new location, is that the reference must point to an SSA local or be an immutable argument. dereference_address has handled SSA locals.

The second one, if we cannot guard to the reference point to an SSA local in visit_assign, we have to rewrite the value to opaque. This avoids unifying the following dereferences that also are references:

let b: &T = *a;
// ... `a` is allowed to be modified. `c` and `b` have different borrowing lifetime.
// Unifying them will extend the lifetime of `b`.
let c: &T = *a; 

See also #130853.

This still allows unifying non-reference dereferences:

let a: &T = ...;
let b: T = *a;
// ... a is NOT allowed to be modified.
let c: T = *a; 

r? @cjgillot

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Dec 29, 2025
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@dianqk
Copy link
Member Author

dianqk commented Jan 1, 2026

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 1, 2026
[DRAFT] GVN: Only propagate borrows from SSA-locals
@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jan 1, 2026
@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Jan 2, 2026

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: f23e5de (f23e5de34a174f8bd281d69038b68bf6332b1af6, parent: fcd630976c460c819c4bbcaf107d0c94501205d8)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (f23e5de): 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)
0.3% [0.1%, 0.9%] 20
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.4% [0.1%, 2.0%] 27
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.6% [-1.2%, -0.2%] 4
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.4%, -0.1%] 7
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.1% [-1.2%, 0.9%] 24

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.1%, secondary -4.7%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.4% [1.9%, 2.8%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-3.4% [-6.8%, -0.6%] 3
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-4.7% [-6.5%, -3.7%] 3
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.1% [-6.8%, 2.8%] 5

Cycles

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

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.0%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.7% [0.0%, 6.9%] 11
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.0%, 0.2%] 14
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.1% [-1.0%, -0.0%] 27
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.0%] 5
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.1% [-1.0%, 6.9%] 38

Bootstrap: 475.254s -> 472.456s (-0.59%)
Artifact size: 390.85 MiB -> 390.82 MiB (-0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Jan 2, 2026
@dianqk
Copy link
Member Author

dianqk commented Jan 2, 2026

@bors try parent=fcd630976c460c819c4bbcaf107d0c94501205d8 @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 2, 2026
[DRAFT] GVN: Only propagate borrows from SSA-locals
@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jan 2, 2026
@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Jan 2, 2026

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 2183340 (218334063dc5d70b7f9d69202bf22750167c6cbf, parent: fcd630976c460c819c4bbcaf107d0c94501205d8)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (2183340): 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)
0.3% [0.1%, 0.9%] 17
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.3% [0.1%, 0.8%] 23
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.6% [-1.2%, -0.2%] 4
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.4%, -0.1%] 8
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.1% [-1.2%, 0.9%] 21

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.9%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
1.7% [1.7%, 1.7%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-3.0% [-4.6%, -0.6%] 3
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.9% [-4.6%, 1.7%] 4

Cycles

Results (secondary -2.3%)

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

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

Binary size

Results (primary 0.2%, 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)
0.7% [0.0%, 6.9%] 11
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.0%, 0.2%] 14
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.2% [-0.9%, -0.0%] 11
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.1%, -0.0%] 5
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.2% [-0.9%, 6.9%] 22

Bootstrap: 475.254s -> 472.783s (-0.52%)
Artifact size: 390.85 MiB -> 390.84 MiB (-0.00%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jan 2, 2026
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@dianqk
Copy link
Member Author

dianqk commented Jan 17, 2026

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Feb 4, 2026

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.

@dianqk
Copy link
Member Author

dianqk commented Feb 4, 2026

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2026
GVN: Only propagate borrows from SSA locals
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Feb 4, 2026
@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Feb 5, 2026

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: f2def88 (f2def887c3d08e9845884a5677473348acc2e23f, parent: db3e99bbab28c6ca778b13222becdea54533d908)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (f2def88): 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)
1.5% [0.9%, 2.1%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.7% [0.3%, 2.0%] 5
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.5% [-1.9%, -1.0%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.0% [-1.9%, 2.1%] 4

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.6%, secondary 0.3%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.5% [1.7%, 3.5%] 3
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.5% [0.5%, 2.5%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-5.3% [-7.6%, -3.1%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.0% [-2.0%, -2.0%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.6% [-7.6%, 3.5%] 5

Cycles

Results (primary 2.8%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.8% [2.8%, 2.8%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.8% [2.8%, 2.8%] 1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.0%, 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)
0.4% [0.0%, 1.2%] 5
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.2% [1.2%, 1.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.3% [-1.4%, -0.0%] 6
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.2%, -0.0%] 8
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.0% [-1.4%, 1.2%] 11

Bootstrap: 472.94s -> 474.175s (0.26%)
Artifact size: 398.12 MiB -> 398.12 MiB (-0.00%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Feb 5, 2026
@dianqk
Copy link
Member Author

dianqk commented Feb 5, 2026

The two latest perf results that were built with LLVM 22 are different. I am not sure why, but the latest result seems acceptable to me.

@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

cjgillot commented Feb 8, 2026

@bors r+

@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Feb 8, 2026

📌 Commit 9c029d2 has been approved by cjgillot

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@rust-bors 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 Feb 8, 2026
@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-bors rust-bors bot added merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Feb 8, 2026
@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Feb 8, 2026

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: cjgillot
Duration: 3h 8m 13s
Pushing 13c3873 to main...

@rust-bors rust-bors bot merged commit 13c3873 into rust-lang:main Feb 8, 2026
13 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.95.0 milestone Feb 8, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 8, 2026

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 08a4ce5 (parent) -> 13c3873 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 4 test diffs

4 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 13c38730d981289cc7ae4cc109fd7756bf83ee67 --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-apple-various: 1h 12m -> 1h 1m (-15.5%)
  2. aarch64-gnu-llvm-20-1: 1h 3m -> 57m 6s (-10.6%)
  3. x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-2: 1h 28m -> 1h 36m (+9.5%)
  4. x86_64-msvc-ext3: 1h 42m -> 1h 52m (+9.4%)
  5. dist-i586-gnu-i586-i686-musl: 1h 26m -> 1h 34m (+9.2%)
  6. x86_64-msvc-2: 2h 17m -> 2h 29m (+8.9%)
  7. x86_64-gnu-stable: 2h 28m -> 2h 15m (-8.9%)
  8. x86_64-msvc-ext2: 1h 35m -> 1h 42m (+8.2%)
  9. dist-x86_64-apple: 2h 9m -> 1h 59m (-7.4%)
  10. pr-check-1: 34m 21s -> 31m 50s (-7.3%)
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.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (13c3873): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

Our benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR.
This might be an actual regression, but it can also be just noise.

Next Steps:

  • If the regression was expected or you think it can be justified,
    please write a comment with sufficient written justification, and add
    @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged to it, to mark the regression as triaged.
  • If you think that you know of a way to resolve the regression, try to create
    a new PR with a fix for the regression.
  • If you do not understand the regression or you think that it is just noise,
    you can ask the @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance working group for help (members of this group
    were already notified of this PR).

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

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)
1.0% [0.3%, 2.0%] 3
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.7% [0.3%, 1.9%] 4
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.0% [-1.0%, -1.0%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.2% [-1.0%, 2.0%] 5

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.1%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.8% [2.7%, 3.0%] 3
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-4.0% [-4.0%, -4.0%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.1% [-4.0%, 3.0%] 4

Cycles

Results (primary 2.1%, secondary 1.1%)

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

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.1% [2.1%, 2.1%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.6% [2.1%, 3.2%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.0% [-2.0%, -2.0%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) 2.1% [2.1%, 2.1%] 1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, 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)
0.4% [0.0%, 1.2%] 5
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.2% [1.2%, 1.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.1% [-0.4%, -0.0%] 6
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.1% [-0.2%, -0.0%] 8
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.1% [-0.4%, 1.2%] 11

Bootstrap: 476.152s -> 471.737s (-0.93%)
Artifact size: 397.96 MiB -> 397.92 MiB (-0.01%)

@dianqk dianqk deleted the gvn-ssa-borrow branch February 8, 2026 10:49
@panstromek
Copy link
Contributor

perf triage:

Results match pre merge results, which was accepted in #150485 (comment).

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged

@rustbot rustbot added the perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. label Feb 9, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

GVN misunderstands aliasing, can create overlapping assignments (again)

7 participants