Master bootstrap update

[pietroalbini]

Part of the release process.

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

[Mark-Simulacrum]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit d894ce8 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[matthiaskrgr]

@bors rollup=iffy

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit d894ce8 with merge 251206c...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing 251206c to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (251206c): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	3

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results (primary -2.0%, secondary 2.2%)

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)	2.2%	[2.2%, 2.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-2.0%, -2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.0%	[-2.0%, -2.0%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 760.26s -> 763.48s (0.42%)
Artifact size: 325.79 MiB -> 325.77 MiB (-0.01%)

[rylev]

Marking as triaged since I imagine this is just noise, and even if it isn't, it's not worth investigating.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged