PS-8185 - Fix memory leak on dict_check_sys_tables

**Problem:**

The following leak is detected when running the test
`encryption.upgrade_crypt_data_57_v1`:

```
==388399==ERROR: LeakSanitizer: detected memory leaks

Direct leak of 70 byte(s) in 1 object(s) allocated from:
    #0 0x7f5f87812808 in __interceptor_malloc ../../../../src/libsanitizer/asan/asan_malloc_linux.cc:144
    #1 0x55f098875d2c in ut::detail::malloc(unsigned long) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/include/detail/ut/allocator_traits.h:71
    #2 0x55f098875db5 in ut::detail::Alloc_fn::malloc(unsigned long) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/include/detail/ut/allocator_traits.h:88
    #3 0x55f0988aa4b9 in void* ut::detail::Alloc_fn::alloc<false>(unsigned long) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/include/detail/ut/allocator_traits.h:97
    #4 0x55f09889b7a3 in void* ut::detail::Alloc_pfs::alloc<false>(unsigned long, unsigned int) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/include/detail/ut/alloc.h:275
    #5 0x55f09889bb9a in std::enable_if<ut::detail::Alloc_pfs::is_pfs_instrumented_v, void*>::type ut::detail::Alloc_<ut::detail::Alloc_pfs>::alloc<false, ut::detail::Alloc_pfs>(unsigned long, unsigned int) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/include/detail/ut/alloc.h:438
    #6 0x55f0988767dd in ut::malloc_withkey(ut::PSI_memory_key_t, unsigned long) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/include/ut0new.h:604
    #7 0x55f09937dd3c in rec_copy_prefix_to_buf_old /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/rem/rem0rec.cc:1206
    #8 0x55f09937dfd3 in rec_copy_prefix_to_buf(unsigned char const*, dict_index_t const*, unsigned long, unsigned char**, unsigned long*) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/rem/rem0rec.cc:1233
    #9 0x55f098ae0ae3 in dict_index_copy_rec_order_prefix(dict_index_t const*, unsigned char const*, unsigned long*, unsigned char**, unsigned long*) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/dict/dict0dict.cc:3764
    #10 0x55f098c3d0ba in btr_pcur_t::store_position(mtr_t*) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/btr/btr0pcur.cc:141
    #11 0x55f098c027b6 in dict_getnext_system_low /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/dict/dict0load.cc:256
    #12 0x55f098c02933 in dict_getnext_system(btr_pcur_t*, mtr_t*) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/dict/dict0load.cc:298
    percona#13 0x55f098c0c05b in dict_check_sys_tables /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/dict/dict0load.cc:1573
    percona#14 0x55f098c1770d in dict_load_tablespaces_for_upgrade() /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/dict/dict0load.cc:3233
    percona#15 0x55f0987e9ed1 in innobase_init_files /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/handler/ha_innodb.cc:6072
    percona#16 0x55f098819ed3 in innobase_ddse_dict_init /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/innobase/handler/ha_innodb.cc:13985
    percona#17 0x55f097fa5c10 in dd::bootstrap::DDSE_dict_init(THD*, dict_init_mode_t, unsigned int) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/sql/dd/impl/bootstrap/bootstrapper.cc:742
    percona#18 0x55f0986696a6 in dd::upgrade_57::do_pre_checks_and_initialize_dd(THD*) /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/sql/dd/upgrade_57/upgrade.cc:922
    percona#19 0x55f09550e082 in handle_bootstrap /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/sql/bootstrap.cc:327
    percona#20 0x55f0997416e7 in pfs_spawn_thread /home/ldonoso/src/release-8.0.29-20/storage/perfschema/pfs.cc:2943
    percona#21 0x7f5f876a1608 in start_thread /build/glibc-SzIz7B/glibc-2.31/nptl/pthread_create.c:477

SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: 70 byte(s) leaked in 1 allocation(s).
```

**Solution:**

The cause of the leak raises from the traversing of `pcur`. When
traversing is exhausted `pcur.close()` is automatically called and all
`pcur` resources are deallocated.

Percona adds some early returns to the traverse, hence sometimes the
traversing is not exhausted and `pcur.close()` is not called.

The solution is calling `pcur.close()` explicitly. `close()` is an
idempotent function so it is not a bug if it is called several times as
a result of this change.

storage/innobase/dict/dict0load.cc

@@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
 #include "mysql_version.h"
 #include "page0page.h"
 #include "rem0cmp.h"
+#include "scope_guard.h"
 #include "srv0srv.h"
 #include "srv0start.h"
 
@@ -1556,6 +1557,8 @@ static inline std::pair<bool, space_id_t> dict_check_sys_tables(bool validate) {
 
   DBUG_TRACE;
 
+  auto guard = create_scope_guard([&pcur]() { pcur.close(); });
+
   ut_ad(dict_sys_mutex_own());
 
   mtr_start(&mtr);