Mark Location::caller() as #[inline]

[bjorn3]

This function gets compiled to a single register move as it actually gets it's return value passed in as argument.

[rust-highfive]

r? @scottmcm

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

[joshtriplett]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 6d0b61e with merge da29afd45000f8726fab74f84fed8e1d0fab5ed6...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: da29afd45000f8726fab74f84fed8e1d0fab5ed6 (da29afd45000f8726fab74f84fed8e1d0fab5ed6)

[rust-timer]

Queued da29afd45000f8726fab74f84fed8e1d0fab5ed6 with parent 168a020, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (da29afd45000f8726fab74f84fed8e1d0fab5ed6): comparison url.

Summary:

• Primary benchmarks: no relevant changes found
• Secondary benchmarks: no relevant changes found. 2 results were found to be statistically significant but too small to be relevant.

	Regressions 😿 (primary)	Regressions 😿 (secondary)	Improvements 🎉 (primary)	Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	All 😿 🎉 (primary)
count1	0	2	0	0	0
mean2	N/A	0.3%	N/A	N/A	N/A
max	N/A	0.3%	N/A	N/A	N/A

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

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 led to changes in compiler perf.

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

Footnotes

1. number of relevant changes ↩

2. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩

[scottmcm]

Inlining a function with a non-monomorphized-looking signature seems perfectly reasonable to me.

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 6d0b61e has been approved by scottmcm

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 6d0b61e with merge 596dece...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: scottmcm
Pushing 596dece to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (596dece): comparison url.

Summary:

• Primary benchmarks: no relevant changes found
• Secondary benchmarks: no relevant changes found. 1 results were found to be statistically significant but too small to be relevant.

	Regressions 😿 (primary)	Regressions 😿 (secondary)	Improvements 🎉 (primary)	Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	All 😿 🎉 (primary)
count1	0	0	0	1	0
mean2	N/A	N/A	N/A	-0.3%	N/A
max	N/A	N/A	N/A	-0.3%	N/A

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Footnotes

1. number of relevant changes ↩

2. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩

[bjorn3]

I think this broke the ui/rfc-2091-track-caller/intrinsic-wrapper.rs test with cg_clif for some reason:

command: "/home/runner/work/rustc_codegen_cranelift/rustc_codegen_cranelift/rust/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/ui/rfc-2091-track-caller/intrinsic-wrapper.mir-opt/a"
stdout: none
--- stderr -------------------------------
thread 'main' panicked at 'assertion failed: `(left == right)`
  left: `"/home/runner/work/rustc_codegen_cranelift/rustc_codegen_cranelift/build_sysroot/sysroot_src/library/core/src/panic/location.rs"`,
 right: `"/home/runner/work/rustc_codegen_cranelift/rustc_codegen_cranelift/rust/src/test/ui/rfc-2091-track-caller/intrinsic-wrapper.rs"`', /home/runner/work/rustc_codegen_cranelift/rustc_codegen_cranelift/rust/src/test/ui/rfc-2091-track-caller/intrinsic-wrapper.rs:11:5

https://github.com/bjorn3/rustc_codegen_cranelift/runs/5831236628?check_suite_focus=true