Revert "[BOLT][BTI] Skip inlining BasicBlocks containing indirect tailcalls" (#169881)

Reverts #168403

The attached lit test is failing in some build configurations.

Author: bgergely0

bolt/lib/Passes/Inliner.cpp

@@ -491,32 +491,6 @@ bool Inliner::inlineCallsInFunction(BinaryFunction &Function) {
         }
       }
 
-      // AArch64 BTI:
-      // If the callee has an indirect tailcall (BR), we would transform it to
-      // an indirect call (BLR) in InlineCall. Because of this, we would have to
-      // update the BTI at the target of the tailcall. However, these targets
-      // are not known. Instead, we skip inlining blocks with indirect
-      // tailcalls.
-      auto HasIndirectTailCall = [&](const BinaryFunction &BF) -> bool {
-        for (const auto &BB : BF) {
-          for (const auto &II : BB) {
-            if (BC.MIB->isIndirectBranch(II) && BC.MIB->isTailCall(II)) {
-              return true;
-            }
-          }
-        }
-        return false;
-      };
-
-      if (BC.isAArch64() && BC.usesBTI() &&
-          HasIndirectTailCall(*TargetFunction)) {
-        ++InstIt;
-        LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs() << "BOLT-DEBUG: Skipping inlining block with tailcall"
-                          << " in " << Function << " : " << BB->getName()
-                          << " to keep BTIs consistent.\n");
-        continue;
-      }
-
       LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs() << "BOLT-DEBUG: inlining call to " << *TargetFunction
                         << " in " << Function << " : " << BB->getName()
                         << ". Count: " << BB->getKnownExecutionCount()