Lazify TargetOptions::*link_args fields

[Urgau]

This PR lazify the link args by introducing MaybeLazy, a 3-way lazy container (borrowed, owned and lazied state).

Split from #122703
r? @petrochenkov

[rustbot]

These commits modify compiler targets.
(See the Target Tier Policy.)

[Urgau]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 990db03 with merge f36d603...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: f36d603 (f36d60300ac847dfce3fef9a95195cb8788e7942)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (f36d603): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - 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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.3%	[0.2%, 0.3%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-0.5%, -0.1%]	11
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary 6.8%)

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)	6.8%	[3.0%, 10.4%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 767.644s -> 769.722s (0.27%)
Artifact size: 328.87 MiB -> 328.89 MiB (0.01%)

[petrochenkov]

I'm going to make a hard decision and close this as well.
There are some perf improvements, but they are not sufficient to compensate for the massive uglification of interfaces.

My apologies for the wasted effort, I'm sure this was pretty annoying to implement due to the sheer number of the target specs needing modifications.

I'm not if we could recycle these patches later.
If const eval is advanced enough to produce target specs at compile time, then it will support const allocations, which means that building vectors and maps will be a cheap compile time activity, and that laziness will not be necessary.