Fast reject for NeedsNonConstDrop

[fee1-dead]

Hopefully fixes the regression in #88558.

I've always wanted to help with the performance of rustc, but it doesn't feel the same when you are fixing a regression caused by your own PR...

r? @oli-obk

[oli-obk]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit aade63a with merge 60b30e5f8fe0ad376ce7eab766d503d58a0f3b72...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 60b30e5f8fe0ad376ce7eab766d503d58a0f3b72 (60b30e5f8fe0ad376ce7eab766d503d58a0f3b72)

[rust-timer]

Queued 60b30e5f8fe0ad376ce7eab766d503d58a0f3b72 with parent e846f9c, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (60b30e5f8fe0ad376ce7eab766d503d58a0f3b72): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to large relevant improvements 🎉 in compiler performance.

• Large improvement in instruction counts (up to -2.6% on full builds of ucd)

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

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 led to changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

[oli-obk]

That did the trick, thanks

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit aade63a has been approved by oli-obk

[bors]

🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 100. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit aade63a with merge 8e398f5...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing 8e398f5 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (8e398f5): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to large relevant mixed results 🤷 in compiler performance.

• Large improvement in instruction counts (up to -2.5% on full builds of html5ever)
• Small regression in instruction counts (up to 0.3% on incr-patched: println builds of deep-vector)

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression

[oli-obk]

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged

fixes the larger part of the perf regression from #88558