Auto merge of #91491 - spastorino:revert-91354, r=oli-obk

Revert "Auto merge of #91354 - fee1-dead:const_env, r=spastorino"

This reverts commit 18bb8c6, reversing
changes made to d9baa36.

Reverts #91354 in order to address #91489. We would need to place this changes in a more granular way and would also be nice to address the small perf regression that was also introduced.

r? `@oli-obk`
cc `@fee1-dead`

Author: bors

compiler/rustc_borrowck/src/type_check/mod.rs

@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ use rustc_middle::ty::fold::TypeFoldable;
 use rustc_middle::ty::subst::{GenericArgKind, SubstsRef, UserSubsts};
 use rustc_middle::ty::{
     self, CanonicalUserTypeAnnotation, CanonicalUserTypeAnnotations, OpaqueTypeKey, RegionVid,
-    ToPredicate, Ty, TyCtxt, UserType, UserTypeAnnotationIndex,
+    ToPredicate, Ty, TyCtxt, UserType, UserTypeAnnotationIndex, WithConstness,
 };
 use rustc_span::def_id::CRATE_DEF_ID;
 use rustc_span::{Span, DUMMY_SP};

compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/const_eval/eval_queries.rs

@@ -7,7 +7,6 @@ use crate::interpret::{
 };
 
 use rustc_errors::ErrorReported;
-use rustc_hir as hir;
 use rustc_hir::def::DefKind;
 use rustc_middle::mir;
 use rustc_middle::mir::interpret::ErrorHandled;
@@ -216,7 +215,6 @@ pub fn eval_to_const_value_raw_provider<'tcx>(
     tcx: TyCtxt<'tcx>,
     key: ty::ParamEnvAnd<'tcx, GlobalId<'tcx>>,
 ) -> ::rustc_middle::mir::interpret::EvalToConstValueResult<'tcx> {
-    assert!(key.param_env.constness() == hir::Constness::Const);
     // see comment in eval_to_allocation_raw_provider for what we're doing here
     if key.param_env.reveal() == Reveal::All {
         let mut key = key;
@@ -251,7 +249,6 @@ pub fn eval_to_allocation_raw_provider<'tcx>(
     tcx: TyCtxt<'tcx>,
     key: ty::ParamEnvAnd<'tcx, GlobalId<'tcx>>,
 ) -> ::rustc_middle::mir::interpret::EvalToAllocationRawResult<'tcx> {
-    assert!(key.param_env.constness() == hir::Constness::Const);
     // Because the constant is computed twice (once per value of `Reveal`), we are at risk of
     // reporting the same error twice here. To resolve this, we check whether we can evaluate the
     // constant in the more restrictive `Reveal::UserFacing`, which most likely already was