Fix tail calls to #[track_caller] functions

[WaffleLapkin]

We want #[track_caller] to be semver independent, i.e. it should not be a breaking change to add or remove it. Since it changes ABI of a function (adding an additional argument) we have to be careful to preserve this property when adding tail calls.

The only way to achieve this that I can see is:

• we forbid tail calls in functions which are marked with #[track_caller] (already implemented)
• tail-calling a #[track_caller] marked function downgrades the tail-call to a normal call (or equivalently tail-calls the shim made by fn def to fn ptr cast) (this pr)

Ideally the downgrade would be performed by a MIR pass, but that requires post mono MIR opts (cc @saethlin, #131650). For now I've changed code in cg_ssa to accomodate this behaviour (+ added a hack to mono collector so that the shim is actually generated)

Additionally I added a lint, although I don't think it's strictly necessary.

Alternative to #144762 (and thus closes #144762)
Fixes #144755

[rustbot]

r? @fee1-dead

rustbot has assigned @fee1-dead.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[rustbot]

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

[WaffleLapkin]

I do not get it, both tests pass for me locally ?_?

[WaffleLapkin]

Update: @jieyouxu figured this out. It looks like the test suite that failed was running with --pass=check, which caused the tests that depend on diagnostic from codegen backend to fail. I've added //@ ignore-pass so it should be good now

[fee1-dead]

not too familiar with tail calls but the diff looks good to me

r? compiler

[WaffleLapkin]

r? lqd maybe (since you were excited about tail calls ^^')