Apply impl_super_outlives optimization to new trait solver

[compiler-errors]

I never did #128746 for the new solver.

r? lcnr

[compiler-errors]

Just for funsies

@bors2 try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

⌛ Trying commit 24ea06c with merge 06b3d3c…

To cancel the try build, run the command @bors2 try cancel.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 06b3d3c (06b3d3c388ca170b3af5c88c3805eb4773f60db7, parent: 8de4c7234dd9b97c9d76b58671343fdbbc9a433e)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (06b3d3c): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text below

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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged. If not, please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If its results are neutral or positive, the label will be automatically removed.

@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)	0.6%	[0.5%, 0.8%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.4%	[-0.6%, -0.2%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.4%, secondary 0.6%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	5.0%	[5.0%, 5.0%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.2%	[-1.2%, -1.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.4%	[-2.1%, 5.0%]	2

Cycles

Results (primary 2.4%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.4%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.4%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 691.904s -> 690.865s (-0.15%)
Artifact size: 372.02 MiB -> 371.91 MiB (-0.03%)

[compiler-errors]

🤷 still worth I think. I think the coercions perf changes are not related.

[lcnr]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 24ea06c has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[workingjubilee]

the never PRs should be allowed to drain I think. let's at least force a few in before someone puts in another rollup.

@bors p=5

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 24ea06c with merge 2801f9a...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: lcnr
Pushing 2801f9a to master...

[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 a17780d (parent) -> 2801f9a (this PR)

Test differences

Show 12 test diffs

12 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 2801f9aaf9b7580d9b230b532b0700709857cc88 --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. dist-aarch64-linux: 8396.3s -> 5650.8s (-32.7%)
2. dist-aarch64-apple: 5213.6s -> 6354.9s (21.9%)
3. dist-apple-various: 5969.0s -> 7019.9s (17.6%)
4. dist-x86_64-msvc-alt: 8461.2s -> 9868.4s (16.6%)
5. mingw-check-tidy: 80.3s -> 67.5s (-16.0%)
6. x86_64-apple-2: 4715.3s -> 5407.0s (14.7%)
7. x86_64-apple-1: 6637.4s -> 7431.8s (12.0%)
8. dist-x86_64-windows-gnullvm: 5859.0s -> 5403.6s (-7.8%)
9. dist-ohos-aarch64: 4529.4s -> 4196.5s (-7.3%)
10. dist-x86_64-netbsd: 4967.1s -> 4616.7s (-7.1%)

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 (2801f9a): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - 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
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-0.8%, -0.3%]	5
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -5.8%, secondary -1.9%)

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)	-5.8%	[-7.5%, -4.1%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.9%	[-2.5%, -1.3%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-5.8%	[-7.5%, -4.1%]	2

Cycles

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 691.011s -> 690.11s (-0.13%)
Artifact size: 372.15 MiB -> 372.15 MiB (0.00%)