ci: adjust prof asan to avoid nightly (and other build refactoring)

[morrisonlevi]

Description

The main goal here is to avoid +nightly toolchains so we can drop it from our images, which will save a substantial amount of bytes to pull on every job. Cleans up other build and CI stuff while I'm at it, such as refactoring the compile_profiler Make target and selecting features and some stale docs.

I tried separating out the "independent" changes to docs but the changes are kind of tied together, since this is small enough, I think we can just review it instead of trying to untangle it (not worth the effort IMO).

Reviewer checklist

• Test coverage seems ok.
• Appropriate labels assigned.

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks [ profiler ]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-09-28 15:10:34

Comparing candidate commit 33488c7 in PR branch levi/prof-rustc-bootstrap-instead-of-nightly with baseline commit 8e9b2ff in branch levi/claude-docs-staleness.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 27 metrics, 9 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

• 🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
• 🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

Unstable benchmarks

These benchmarks have a confidence interval too wide to call a change; treat them as noise rather than signal.

scenario:php-profiler-exceptions-control

• unstable cpu_system_time [+0.854ms; +8.003ms] or [+2.119%; +19.868%]
• unstable cpu_user_time [-8.436ms; -1.911ms] or [-12.991%; -2.943%]

scenario:php-profiler-exceptions-with-profiler

• unstable cpu_system_time [-5191.099µs; +6033.099µs] or [-11.486%; +13.349%]
• unstable cpu_user_time [-8.676ms; +5.142ms] or [-11.304%; +6.700%]

scenario:php-profiler-exceptions-with-profiler-and-timeline

• unstable cpu_system_time [+0.522ms; +6.640ms] or [+1.128%; +14.346%]

scenario:php-profiler-timeline-memory-control

• unstable cpu_system_time [-6.141ms; +2.564ms] or [-13.784%; +5.755%]

scenario:php-profiler-timeline-memory-with-profiler

• unstable cpu_system_time [-25.708ms; +35.212ms] or [-5.931%; +8.124%]
• unstable cpu_usage_percentage [-1.581%; +10.066%]

scenario:php-profiler-timeline-memory-with-profiler-and-timeline

• unstable cpu_system_time [-4.244ms; +41.957ms] or [-1.035%; +10.229%]

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks [ tracer ]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-09-28 15:47:59

Comparing candidate commit 33488c7 in PR branch levi/prof-rustc-bootstrap-instead-of-nightly with baseline commit 8e9b2ff in branch master.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 1 performance improvements and 2 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 190 metrics, 1 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

• 🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
• 🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

scenario:HookBench/benchWithoutHook

• 🟥 execution_time [+4.088µs; +6.875µs] or [+5.003%; +8.413%]

scenario:MessagePackSerializationBench/benchMessagePackSerialization-opcache

• 🟩 execution_time [-4.893µs; -2.847µs] or [-4.247%; -2.472%]

scenario:SamplingRuleMatchingBench/benchRegexMatching2

• 🟥 execution_time [+55.093ns; +115.907ns] or [+3.797%; +7.988%]

Unstable benchmarks

These benchmarks have a confidence interval too wide to call a change; treat them as noise rather than signal.

scenario:LaravelBench/benchLaravelDdprof-opcache

• unstable execution_time [-538.847µs; +867.367µs] or [-4.147%; +6.675%]

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-28T15:49:58.550885Z	33488c7	Draft marked ready
🔒 Security Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-28T15:48:01.986251Z	33488c7	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[realFlowControl]

I think we can remove the "nightly" references completely, yes?