Update to LLVM 21.1.0 rc3

[nikic]

No description provided.

[rustbot]

r? @cuviper

rustbot has assigned @cuviper.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[rustbot]

⚠️ Warning ⚠️

• Some commits in this PR modify submodules.

  If this was not intentional, see I changed a submodule on accident in the rustc dev guide.

[cuviper]

@bors r+ rollup=never

[bors]

📌 Commit 3fb4be2 has been approved by cuviper

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[nikic]

@bors p=1 to unblock stdarch CI

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 3fb4be2 with merge 8a450eb...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[cuviper]

curl: (7) Failed to connect to ftp.gnu.org port 443 after 1309 ms: Network is unreachable

HTTPS does appear to be down for me too, but HTTP works.

FWIW, the same files are also available on https://sourceware.org/pub/.

[nikic]

@bors try jobs=dist-various-2

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 983e529 (983e52915adfed524c447997aca2bc2b127e2192, parent: 1c9952f4dd6e0947ee91f07130c03813a088a894)

[nikic]

@bors r=cuviper

[bors]

📌 Commit 1d44bbe has been approved by cuviper

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 1d44bbe with merge f5b8a11...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: cuviper
Pushing f5b8a11 to master...

[github-actions]

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 350d0ef (parent) -> f5b8a11 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 3 test diffs

Stage 2

• [run-make] tests/run-make/compressed-debuginfo-zstd: pass -> ignore (ignored if LLVM wasn't build with zstd for ELF section compression (we want LLVM/LLD to be built with zstd support)) (J0)

Additionally, 2 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Job group index

• J0: x86_64-gnu-nopt

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard f5b8a11fecf23cb669f6d1feae81aafc2930aeb9 --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. x86_64-apple-1: 8677.7s -> 11574.7s (33.4%)
2. x86_64-apple-2: 5693.1s -> 3853.5s (-32.3%)
3. x86_64-gnu-debug: 6928.2s -> 8813.9s (27.2%)
4. tidy: 116.0s -> 87.3s (-24.7%)
5. pr-check-1: 1670.4s -> 2037.4s (22.0%)
6. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 3048.3s -> 3643.4s (19.5%)
7. test-various: 4854.5s -> 5676.6s (16.9%)
8. x86_64-gnu-nopt: 7313.1s -> 8525.0s (16.6%)
9. aarch64-apple: 6266.3s -> 5232.0s (-16.5%)
10. x86_64-gnu-tools: 3732.7s -> 4302.8s (15.3%)

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]

Finished benchmarking commit (f5b8a11): 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)	0.2%	[0.1%, 0.2%]	8
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.7%	[-1.8%, -0.2%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-0.2%, 0.2%]	9

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.1%, secondary -1.9%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.1%	[1.1%, 1.1%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.5%	[1.5%, 1.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.6%	[-4.3%, -2.9%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.1%	[1.1%, 1.1%]	1

Cycles

Results (secondary 1.3%)

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)	4.0%	[4.0%, 4.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.4%	[-1.4%, -1.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

Results (secondary 0.2%)

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)	0.3%	[0.1%, 0.6%]	9
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.0%]	5
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Bootstrap: 468.291s -> 467.825s (-0.10%)
Artifact size: 377.36 MiB -> 377.36 MiB (-0.00%)