fix non_blanket_impls iteration order

[lcnr]

We sometimes iterate over all non_blanket_impls, not sure if this is observable outside
of error messages (i.e. as incremental bugs), but it hopefully fixes the underlying issue of #86986.

It does not fix the issue of #86986, as the iteration order still isn't stable between different targets

r? @nikomatsakis @Aaron1011

[lcnr]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-timer]

Awaiting bors try build completion.

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

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 5ebbb28 with merge 9aa59c4f07da2a73629023de08a2231a65e25965...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 9aa59c4f07da2a73629023de08a2231a65e25965 (9aa59c4f07da2a73629023de08a2231a65e25965)

[rust-timer]

Queued 9aa59c4f07da2a73629023de08a2231a65e25965 with parent 385f8e2, future comparison URL.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (9aa59c4f07da2a73629023de08a2231a65e25965): comparison url.

Summary: This change led to large relevant regressions 😿 in compiler performance.

• Large regression in instruction counts (up to 2.8% on full builds of inflate)

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

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 led 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-review -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

[lcnr]

that doesn't seem like an acceptable regression here, will have to do this differently

[nikomatsakis]

OK. Closing this PR, then.