Improve into_slice_range inlining and add #[track_caller]

[saethlin]

This is a possible solution to #157909. I think the root problem is that LLVM sees the many non-inlinable calls to slice_index_fail and decides that the function must be a bad inlining candidate.

The other strategy I was thinking of was to call try_into_slice_range. I think deduplicating the checking logic in the source between these two functions might just be a good cleanup. But first I'm going to check if this has unexpected perf impact, because I saw mentions of RangeBounds in the compiler source.

[saethlin]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 6a83d7f (6a83d7f17c32155a5e582df6cf5dfcfa8f6d1b67, parent: 01dfd79246f1b2d5f146616deff08223a840a9ae)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (6a83d7f): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. Consider adding rollup=never if this change is not fit for rolling up.

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

Instruction count

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.7%, secondary -2.5%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.7%	[1.3%, 4.1%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.5%	[-2.5%, -2.5%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.7%	[1.3%, 4.1%]	2

Cycles

Results (primary 2.4%, secondary -15.3%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.4%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-15.3%	[-28.6%, -2.0%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.4%]	1

Binary size

Results (primary 0.2%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.3%	[0.1%, 0.9%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.2%	[-0.1%, 0.9%]	5

Bootstrap: 519.231s -> 519.196s (-0.01%)
Artifact size: 401.41 MiB -> 401.45 MiB (0.01%)

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job x86_64-gnu-tools failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

...............................F.................. (50/144)
.................................................. (100/144)
............................................       (144/144)

======== tests/rustdoc-gui/go-to-collapsed-elem.goml ========

[ERROR] line 40
    at `tests/rustdoc-gui/go-to-collapsed-elem.goml` line 21: Error: Node is detached from document: for command `click: "//*[@id='search']//a[@href='../test_docs/struct.Foo.html#method.must_use']"`
    at <file:///checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/rustdoc-gui/doc/test_docs/struct.Foo.html?search=t_use>


<= doc-ui tests done: 143 succeeded, 1 failed, 0 filtered out

Error: ()