canonicalizer: add lookup table

[lcnr]

blocking this on being able to run perf, may be necessary for deeply nested types.

r? @compiler-errors

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #126650) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in engine.rs, potentially modifying the public API of ObligationCtxt.

cc @lcnr, @compiler-errors

[lcnr]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit f572903 with merge e56bc53...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: e56bc53 (e56bc53ff6bf9a336645d2738392697459c461ac)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (e56bc53): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@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)	23.2%	[0.2%, 68.2%]	15
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.5%	[0.4%, 0.6%]	7
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.8%	[-4.4%, -0.2%]	9
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.2%	[-0.3%, -0.2%]	5
All ❌✅ (primary)	13.4%	[-4.4%, 68.2%]	24

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 11.2%)

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)	11.2%	[1.6%, 13.9%]	7
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	11.2%	[1.6%, 13.9%]	7

Cycles

Results (primary 20.1%)

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)	42.6%	[5.0%, 59.5%]	7
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.5%	[-3.1%, -2.0%]	7
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	20.1%	[-3.1%, 59.5%]	14

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 751.027s -> 761.751s (1.43%)
Artifact size: 339.18 MiB -> 339.27 MiB (0.03%)