Make rustc_hir_analysis not depend on rustc_lint.

[nnethercote]

rustc_hir_analysis depends on rustc_lint in just a single function: emit_delayed_lint, which is used by the
"emit_ast_lowering_delayed_lints" checking section within rustc_hir_analysis::check_crate.

This commit moves that function and section to out of rustc_hir_analysis::check_crate, into rustc_interface, eliminating the dependency. This seems reasonable because the delayed lint errors aren't really related to HIR analysis, they were in there just because HIR analysis is what follows AST lowering.

This means rustc_hir_analysis and rustc_lint can both start compiling as soon as rustc_trait_selection finishes. This also changes the error order in one test, which doesn't matter.

The commit also changes emit_delayed_lint to emit_delayed_lints, factoring out some code duplicated in rustdoc.

r? @davidtwco

[nnethercote]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: f563964 (f563964173ddaf1ed3e37d5d0de92ec538aa79c2, parent: 212ef7770dfad656782207fda799bdae28fc5b7b)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (f563964): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible 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 (secondary -3.0%)

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)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.9%	[-6.5%, -2.0%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results (secondary 2.8%)

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)	7.9%	[7.9%, 7.9%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 484.064s -> 483.055s (-0.21%)
Artifact size: 396.84 MiB -> 394.95 MiB (-0.48%)

[rustbot]

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

[davidtwco]

@bors r+

[rust-bors]

📌 Commit a733192 has been approved by davidtwco

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[rust-bors]

💥 Test timed out after 21600s

[Zalathar]

Almost certainly a runner being flaky, but let's do a try job to double-check.

@bors try jobs=arm-android

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 1345cca (1345ccaf63c2892c294c966bbb474e3b2160960d, parent: 23903d01c237d7c7d4fb62b82ca846bc45de4e0c)

[Zalathar]

@bors retry

[rust-bors]

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: davidtwco
Duration: 3h 6m 25s
Pushing e3691a5 to main...

[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 ac40f5e (parent) -> e3691a5 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 2 test diffs

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

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard e3691a5bd58e92999bcbffedf640ecd61e02c29e --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. pr-check-1: 33m 8s -> 25m 5s (-24.3%)
2. dist-x86_64-apple: 2h 27m -> 1h 59m (-18.8%)
3. x86_64-gnu-tools: 1h 4m -> 52m 55s (-17.7%)
4. dist-armv7-linux: 1h 51m -> 1h 32m (-16.8%)
5. tidy: 2m 28s -> 2m 47s (+13.2%)
6. optional-x86_64-gnu-parallel-frontend: 2h 43m -> 2h 22m (-12.6%)
7. i686-gnu-2: 1h 42m -> 1h 30m (-11.8%)
8. x86_64-gnu-debug: 2h 5m -> 1h 51m (-11.6%)
9. dist-s390x-linux: 1h 38m -> 1h 28m (-10.3%)
10. pr-check-2: 43m 38s -> 39m 17s (-10.0%)

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 (e3691a5): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -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)	0.3%	[0.3%, 0.3%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.8%, secondary -2.8%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	3.7%	[3.7%, 3.7%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.7%	[4.7%, 4.7%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-6.5%	[-6.6%, -6.5%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.8%	[-2.2%, 3.7%]	2

Cycles

Results (primary 2.6%, secondary 2.8%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.8%	[2.1%, 3.4%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.6%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 484.633s -> 483.294s (-0.28%)
Artifact size: 397.11 MiB -> 395.05 MiB (-0.52%)