Add #[track_caller] to Duration Div impl

[petertodd]

Previously the location of the divide-by-zero error condition would be attributed to the code in the rust standard library, eg:

thread 'main' panicked at /home/user/.rustup/toolchains/nightly-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/core/src/time.rs:1172:31:
divide by zero error when dividing duration by scalar

With #[track_caller] the error is correctly attributed to the callee.

[rustbot]

r? @jhpratt

rustbot has assigned @jhpratt.
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

[jhpratt]

I'm checking to see if this needs team approval, but personally I have no issue with this.

[jhpratt]

No FCP necessary, but a perf run was suggested.

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 4e4cb10 with merge c9c3813...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: c9c3813 (c9c3813527b3fe47aeb88baa3d8f90a6c17cf284)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (c9c3813): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

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 may lead to changes in compiler perf.

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

Instruction count

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

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.2%)

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)	1.6%	[1.6%, 1.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.2%	[-1.2%, -1.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.2%	[-1.2%, 1.6%]	2

Cycles

Results (primary -1.3%, secondary -9.1%)

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-2.1%, -0.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-9.1%	[-9.1%, -9.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-2.1%, -0.5%]	2

Binary size

Results (secondary 0.0%)

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)	0.0%	[0.0%, 0.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Bootstrap: 775.604s -> 772.241s (-0.43%)
Artifact size: 360.33 MiB -> 360.31 MiB (-0.01%)

[jhpratt]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 4e4cb10 has been approved by jhpratt

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[compiler-errors]

@bors rollup=maybe