UI tests cleanup
`@matthiaskrgr` noticed some `run-pass` annotations in some crash tests that were added in #3922. At that moment they seemed to be necessary to make the tests fail in case of an ICE, but they do not seem to be needed anymore. To test this I forced an ICE in a file with and without annotations, with and without stderr files, and the ICE makes the test fail every time.
In addition, I've applied a suggestion from `@ehuss` and `@jyn514` to add `emit=metadata` to the rustc flags for the UI tests. In my machine this improved the run time from ~17 to ~12 seconds.
changelog: none
Update Clippy
Bi-weekly Clippy update.
This includes a `Cargo.lock` update (d445493479711389f4dea3a0f433041077ba2088), so probably needs `rollup=never`.
r? `@Manishearth`
Allow a unique name to be assigned to dataflow graphviz output
Previously, if the same analysis were invoked multiple times in a single compilation session, the graphviz output for later runs would overwrite that of previous runs. Allow callers to add a unique identifier to each run so this can be avoided.
Revert: or_fun_call should lint calls to `const fn`s with no args
The changes in #5889 and #5984 were done under the incorrect assumption that a `const fn` with no args was guaranteed to be evaluated at compile time. A `const fn` is only guaranteed to be evaluated at compile time if it's inside a const context (the initializer of a `const` or a `static`).
See this [zulip conversation](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/122651-general/topic/Common.20misconception.3A.20.60const.20fn.60.20and.20its.20effect.20on.20codegen/near/208059113) for more details on this common misconception.
Given that none of the linted methods by `or_fun_call` can be called in const contexts, the lint should make no exceptions.
changelog: [`or_fun_call`] lints again calls to `const fn` with no args
Fix a FP in `explicit_counter_loop`
Fixes#4677 and #6074
Fix a false positive in `explicit_counter_loop` where the loop counter is used after incremented, adjust the test so that counters are incremented at the end of the loop and add the test for this false positive.
---
changelog: Fix a false positive in `explicit_counter_loop` where the loop counter is used after incremented
