[EXPERIMENT] Enable frame pointers for rustc

[Noratrieb]

Let's see the impact on

• perfing the dist build
• performance

[rustbot]

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[Noratrieb]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 8b110bf with merge f5b5d154053cc0cdf83bf936023ef1e100428d96...

[Dylan-DPC]

r? @ghost

[rustbot]

Failed to set assignee to ghost: invalid assignee

Note: Only org members, users with write permissions, or people who have commented on the PR may be assigned.

[marmeladema]

Dup of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/107689/files ?

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: f5b5d154053cc0cdf83bf936023ef1e100428d96 (f5b5d154053cc0cdf83bf936023ef1e100428d96)

[Noratrieb]

This is indeed a duplicate of that PR, I wasn't able to find it before I opened this one

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (f5b5d154053cc0cdf83bf936023ef1e100428d96): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - 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)	1.7%	[0.5%, 3.6%]	191
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.6%	[0.5%, 3.1%]	194
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.7%	[0.5%, 3.6%]	191

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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)	2.0%	[1.8%, 2.3%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.7%	[-4.8%, -4.7%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results

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)	1.6%	[1.1%, 2.1%]	6
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.7%	[1.3%, 2.8%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.6%	[1.1%, 2.1%]	6