Remove CollectItemTypesVisitor

[oli-obk]

I always felt like we were very unnecessarily walking the HIR, let's see if perf agrees

There is lots to improve consolidate further here, as we still have 3 item wfchecks:

• check_item (matching on the hir::ItemKind)
  • actually doing trait solver based checks (by using HIR spans)
• lower_item (matching on the hir::ItemKind after loading it again??)
  • just ensure_ok-ing a bunch of queries
• check_item_type (matching on DefKind)
  • some type based checks, mostly ensure_ok-ing a bunch of queries

fixes #121429

[rustbot]

r? @petrochenkov

rustbot has assigned @petrochenkov.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[oli-obk]

@bors2 try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

⌛ Trying commit 8539121 with merge 54f4196…

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

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 54f4196 (54f4196c43452f7bdf022e5c4217701a3af99cca)

[rustbot]

This PR changes a file inside tests/crashes. If a crash was fixed, please move into the corresponding ui subdir and add 'Fixes #' to the PR description to autoclose the issue upon merge.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (54f4196): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ 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 the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.4%, -0.1%]	11
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	3

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -0.9%)

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)	1.6%	[0.6%, 2.6%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.2%	[-2.8%, -1.6%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

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: 749.811s -> 751.196s (0.18%)
Artifact size: 371.77 MiB -> 371.80 MiB (0.01%)

[petrochenkov]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit fa282f4 has been approved by petrochenkov

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit fa282f4 with merge 0b65d0d...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: petrochenkov
Pushing 0b65d0d 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 a5584a8 (parent) -> 0b65d0d (this PR)

Test differences

Show 2 test diffs

Stage 1

• [crashes] tests/crashes/121429.rs: pass -> [missing] (J1)

Stage 2

• [crashes] tests/crashes/121429.rs: pass -> [missing] (J0)

Job group index

• J0: aarch64-apple, aarch64-gnu, arm-android, armhf-gnu, dist-i586-gnu-i586-i686-musl, i686-gnu-1, i686-gnu-nopt-1, i686-msvc-1, test-various, x86_64-apple-1, x86_64-gnu, x86_64-gnu-llvm-19-2, x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-2, x86_64-gnu-nopt, x86_64-gnu-stable, x86_64-mingw-1, x86_64-msvc-1
• J1: x86_64-gnu-llvm-19-3, x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-3

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 0b65d0db5f77c44bf37b4a25489562d68c14aecf --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-apple-various: 6039.6s -> 7390.3s (22.4%)
2. x86_64-apple-1: 5885.3s -> 7075.9s (20.2%)
3. aarch64-apple: 5420.3s -> 4435.1s (-18.2%)
4. x86_64-apple-2: 4986.0s -> 4207.2s (-15.6%)
5. dist-aarch64-apple: 5013.6s -> 5705.9s (13.8%)
6. dist-s390x-linux: 5071.3s -> 4554.3s (-10.2%)
7. dist-ohos-x86_64: 4450.2s -> 4062.8s (-8.7%)
8. x86_64-msvc-2: 6565.5s -> 7110.1s (8.3%)
9. dist-armhf-linux: 4959.2s -> 4623.0s (-6.8%)
10. dist-armv7-linux: 5247.2s -> 4916.5s (-6.3%)

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 (0b65d0d): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.4%, -0.1%]	8
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.2%, secondary 1.2%)

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)	1.2%	[1.2%, 1.2%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.4%	[1.2%, 9.6%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.0%	[-2.0%, -2.0%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.2%	[1.2%, 1.2%]	1

Cycles

Results (secondary 2.4%)

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)	4.1%	[3.8%, 4.6%]	3
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: 752.018s -> 753.249s (0.16%)
Artifact size: 372.42 MiB -> 372.47 MiB (0.01%)