Remove RegionckMode in favor of calling new skip_region_resolution

[jackh726]

Simple cleanup. We can skip a bunch of stuff for places where NLL does the region checking, so skip earlier.

r? rust-lang/types

[rust-highfive]

r? @oli-obk

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[jackh726]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit d716245 with merge 4121223758f40b7023c7bbad26897401ea8dd4fa...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 4121223758f40b7023c7bbad26897401ea8dd4fa (4121223758f40b7023c7bbad26897401ea8dd4fa)

[rust-timer]

Queued 4121223758f40b7023c7bbad26897401ea8dd4fa with parent c570ab5, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (4121223758f40b7023c7bbad26897401ea8dd4fa): comparison url.

Instruction count

• Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found
• Secondary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-0.9%	-4.0%	36
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	-0.3%	-0.3%	3
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-0.9%	-4.0%	36

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results

• Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found
• Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regression found

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	2.0%	2.0%	1
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-3.4%	-4.0%	6
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-3.4%	-4.0%	6

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 may lead to changes in compiler perf.

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

Footnotes

1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩²

2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩²

[oli-obk]

Very nice!

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit d716245 has been approved by oli-obk

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit d716245 with merge 4e02a92...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing 4e02a92 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (4e02a92): comparison url.

Instruction count

• Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvements found
• Secondary benchmarks: mixed results

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	0.2%	0.2%	1
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	1.0%	1.2%	3
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-0.9%	-3.7%	35
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	-0.3%	-0.3%	1
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-0.8%	-3.7%	36

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results

• Primary benchmarks: mixed results
• Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regressions found

	mean1	max	count2
Regressions 😿 (primary)	2.3%	2.5%	2
Regressions 😿 (secondary)	4.3%	4.3%	2
Improvements 🎉 (primary)	-3.1%	-3.6%	7
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	N/A	N/A	0
All 😿🎉 (primary)	-1.9%	-3.6%	9

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

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Footnotes

1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change ↩ ↩²

2. number of relevant changes ↩ ↩²

[pnkfelix]

• Skimming over the comparison (and even just from the table), it seems clear that the improvements far far far outweighed the gains here.
• Marking as triaged.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged