[perf] Test revert of #113320

[lqd]

This tries to revert the entirety of #113320, to see if it caused a regression in rollup #113370, since the results reverting a single commit in #113400 were confusing.

r? @ghost

[lqd]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit ebd6847 with merge 00590a9fe9f13af5f15914a6b4a1e2e5bdf67b7e...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 00590a9fe9f13af5f15914a6b4a1e2e5bdf67b7e (00590a9fe9f13af5f15914a6b4a1e2e5bdf67b7e)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (00590a9fe9f13af5f15914a6b4a1e2e5bdf67b7e): 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

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)	0.7%	[0.7%, 0.7%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.2%	[-3.2%, -3.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.7%	[0.7%, 0.7%]	1

Cycles

Results

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 657.118s -> 657.094s (-0.00%)