skip binder before erasing.

[oli-obk]

r? @ghost

see if this addresses some of the perf regression in #98109

[oli-obk]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit d25d79d with merge 8e7eff8a806384acdbaeb38b2787ad4b880505d4...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 8e7eff8a806384acdbaeb38b2787ad4b880505d4 (8e7eff8a806384acdbaeb38b2787ad4b880505d4)

[rust-timer]

Queued 8e7eff8a806384acdbaeb38b2787ad4b880505d4 with parent 00ebeb8, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (8e7eff8a806384acdbaeb38b2787ad4b880505d4): comparison url.

Instruction count

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

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

• Primary benchmarks: no relevant changes 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)	N/A	N/A	0
Improvements 🎉 (secondary)	-2.9%	-3.3%	4
All 😿🎉 (primary)	N/A	N/A	0

Cycles

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

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. number of relevant changes ↩

[oli-obk]

Has no effect, closing