Add #[inline] to as_deref

[saethlin]

While working on #109247 I found an as_deref call in the compiler that should have been inlined. This fixes the missing inlining (but doesn't address the perf issues I was chasing).

r? @thomcc

[saethlin]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit d3352de with merge a8e55ffe1b355d32d0bd1312ca73e3c14a36b2a2...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: a8e55ffe1b355d32d0bd1312ca73e3c14a36b2a2 (a8e55ffe1b355d32d0bd1312ca73e3c14a36b2a2)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (a8e55ffe1b355d32d0bd1312ca73e3c14a36b2a2): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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 is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.4%	[1.4%, 1.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1

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)	0.8%	[0.6%, 1.1%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.0%	[4.0%, 4.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.8%	[0.6%, 1.1%]	3

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)	0.5%	[0.4%, 0.5%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[-0.6%, 0.5%]	5

[rustbot]

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with @rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs to tag it appropriately. If this PR contains changes to any unstable APIs please edit the PR description to add a link to the relevant API Change Proposal or create one if you haven't already. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

• Stabilizing library features
• Introducing insta-stable changes such as new implementations of existing stable traits on existing stable types
• Introducing new or changing existing unstable library APIs (excluding permanently unstable features / features without a tracking issue)
• Changing public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees
• Changing observable runtime behavior of library APIs

[thomcc]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit d3352de has been approved by thomcc

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[Noratrieb]

perf was mostly neutral and the queue is pretty filled up
@bors rollup=maybe

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit d3352de with merge c4bd06483e83dd098d08b87715bcbe280096d771...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[ehuss]

@bors retry

github incident

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit d3352de with merge 821abb7f68162676092a4855637f32bcd16b5390...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[ehuss]

@bors retry

#108227 since LLVM update

[scottmcm]

@bors p=111 (Let's see if a non-compiler change can get through)

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit d3352de with merge 836d3dc997cc36fda5d1d5e117c90cb1990fa4d2...

[scottmcm]

@bors p=0 (resetting back to normal)

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[scottmcm]

@bors retry

(someone kicked off #106428 instead of this one)

[matthiaskrgr]

@bors rollup=never

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job i686-mingw-2 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

[2525/3103] Linking CXX static library lib\libLLVMARMDisassembler.a
[2526/3103] Linking CXX static library lib\libLLVMARMAsmParser.a
[2527/3103] Linking CXX static library lib\libLLVMHexagonAsmParser.a
FAILED: lib/libLLVMHexagonAsmParser.a 
cmd.exe /C "cd . && "C:\Program Files\CMake\bin\cmake.exe" -E rm -f lib\libLLVMHexagonAsmParser.a && C:\a\rust\rust\mingw32\bin\ar.exe qc lib\libLLVMHexagonAsmParser.a  lib/Target/Hexagon/AsmParser/CMakeFiles/LLVMHexagonAsmParser.dir/HexagonAsmParser.cpp.obj && C:\a\rust\rust\mingw32\bin\ranlib.exe lib\libLLVMHexagonAsmParser.a && cd ."
C:\a\rust\rust\mingw32\bin\ar.exe: could not create temporary file whilst writing archive: no more archived files
[2528/3103] Linking CXX static library lib\libLLVMMSP430Desc.a
[2529/3103] Building CXX object lib/ToolDrivers/llvm-dlltool/CMakeFiles/LLVMDlltoolDriver.dir/DlltoolDriver.cpp.obj
[2530/3103] Linking CXX static library lib\libLLVMAArch64AsmParser.a
[2531/3103] Linking CXX static library lib\libLLVMAArch64Disassembler.a
[2531/3103] Linking CXX static library lib\libLLVMAArch64Disassembler.a
[2532/3103] Building CXX object lib/XRay/CMakeFiles/LLVMXRay.dir/BlockVerifier.cpp.obj
[2533/3103] Building CXX object lib/XRay/CMakeFiles/LLVMXRay.dir/FDRRecordProducer.cpp.obj
[2534/3103] Building CXX object lib/ToolDrivers/llvm-lib/CMakeFiles/LLVMLibDriver.dir/LibDriver.cpp.obj
ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed.
command did not execute successfully, got: exit code: 1


build script failed, must exit now', C:\Users\runneradmin\.cargo\registry\src\index.crates.io-1cd66030c949c28d\cmake-0.1.48\src\lib.rs:975:5
 finished in 321.489 seconds
Build completed unsuccessfully in 0:06:32
Build completed unsuccessfully in 0:06:32
make: *** [Makefile:80: ci-mingw-subset-2] Error 1

[scottmcm]

@bors p=111 (The queue's doing nothing right now, but some are getting through, so let's give this a shot)

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit d3352de with merge db0cbc4...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: thomcc
Pushing db0cbc4 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (db0cbc4): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.6%	[0.6%, 0.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.6%	[0.6%, 0.6%]	1

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)	1.3%	[0.4%, 2.2%]	32
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.3%	[0.4%, 2.2%]	32

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