Portable SIMD subtree update

[folkertdev]

Let's see if this works (we might need a sync the other way first)

[folkertdev]

r? @ghost

[rustbot]

Portable SIMD is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/portable-simd instead.

cc @calebzulawski, @programmerjake

[rustbot]

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

rustbot has assigned @Mark-Simulacrum.
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

Why was this reviewer chosen?

The reviewer was selected based on:

• Fallback group: @Mark-Simulacrum, @jieyouxu
• @Mark-Simulacrum, @jieyouxu expanded to Mark-Simulacrum, jieyouxu

[rustbot]

⚠️ Warning ⚠️

• There are issue links (such as #123) in the commit messages of the following commits.
  Please move them to the PR description, to avoid spamming the issues with references to the commit, and so this bot can automatically canonicalize them to avoid issues with subtree.
  • e66819d
  • 8ada24a
  • 0557e34

[folkertdev]

This looks fine actually, there is a small change that should be synchronized the other way but that's not a blocker.

@bors r+

[rust-bors]

📌 Commit aa656a9 has been approved by folkertdev

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[panstromek]

for #155175

@rust-timer build 354fef2

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (354fef2): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf.

@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
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.1%]	7
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.5%, secondary -2.7%)

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)	-2.5%	[-4.1%, -1.3%]	8
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.7%	[-6.8%, -0.9%]	11
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.5%	[-4.1%, -1.3%]	8

Cycles

Results (primary -5.9%, secondary 3.7%)

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)	3.7%	[3.5%, 3.9%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-5.9%	[-8.4%, -1.7%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-5.9%	[-8.4%, -1.7%]	3

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 490.796s -> 491.322s (0.11%)
Artifact size: 394.14 MiB -> 394.16 MiB (0.00%)