[perf] Don't use ocx in evaluate_obligation in new solver

[compiler-errors]

Also tests how bad it is to rerun in pred_known_to_hold_modulo_regions in new solver.

r? @ghost

[compiler-errors]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit a7ba656 with merge 035fd8b...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 035fd8b (035fd8bd9d7ff216d8c04b95cce049f47b186d4c)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (035fd8b): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no 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.

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

Instruction count

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

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -2.5%)

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)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.1%	[-6.8%, -2.4%]	9
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results (secondary -1.9%)

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)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.9%	[-1.9%, -1.9%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 776.084s -> 776.523s (0.06%)
Artifact size: 366.32 MiB -> 366.31 MiB (-0.00%)

[compiler-errors]

Ok, since perf is not actually much better.