[Don't merge] Learn the performance impact of running lints

[jyn514]

Related: #74704

This is still running some things, not sure why. I think the lints are being run directly by the passes, not through lint_mod.

warning: hidden lifetime parameters in types are deprecated
  --> ui/lint/reasons.rs:21:29
   |
21 |     fn fmt(&self, fmt: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
   |                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^- help: indicate the anonymous lifetime: `<'_>`
   |
   = note: explicit anonymous lifetimes aid reasoning about ownership
note: the lint level is defined here
  --> ui/lint/reasons.rs:5:9
   |
5  | #![warn(elided_lifetimes_in_paths,
   |         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

However most of the lints have gone away.

r? @ghost

[jyn514]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit f794bca with merge 4874c68561d0727f5ff895edef9e1e3473b6e389...

[Mark-Simulacrum]

I would also make sure that these vectors

rust/src/librustc_lint/context.rs

Lines 58 to 62 in 9008693

	pub pre_expansion_passes: Vec<Box<dyn Fn() -> EarlyLintPassObject + sync::Send + sync::Sync>>,
	pub early_passes: Vec<Box<dyn Fn() -> EarlyLintPassObject + sync::Send + sync::Sync>>,
	pub late_passes: Vec<Box<dyn Fn() -> LateLintPassObject + sync::Send + sync::Sync>>,
	/// This is unique in that we construct them per-module, so not once.
	pub late_module_passes: Vec<Box<dyn Fn() -> LateLintPassObject + sync::Send + sync::Sync>>,

are all empty.

[jyn514]

@bors help

[jyn514]

@bors cancel

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions, checks-azure
Build commit: 4874c68561d0727f5ff895edef9e1e3473b6e389 (4874c68561d0727f5ff895edef9e1e3473b6e389)

[rust-timer]

Queued 4874c68561d0727f5ff895edef9e1e3473b6e389 with parent 9008693, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking try commit (4874c68561d0727f5ff895edef9e1e3473b6e389): comparison url.

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying rollup- to bors.

Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up.

@bors rollup=never

[jyn514]

decrease of at most 3.5%, mostly in the 1% range, no increases at all :D

[Mark-Simulacrum]

Closing, seems like we have an initial assessment at least.