resolve: Introduce (Local,Extern)Module newtypes for local and external modules respectively

[petrochenkov]

Right now both LocalModule and ExternModule refer to the same ModuleData, but the module data for local and extern modules can potentially be made quite different, and we can specialize name lookup for both cases as an optimization.

Declaration creation for local and external modules was already specialized as a part of the parallel import resolution work (see define_local and define_extern, #145108 and previous PRs), because they have different properties with regards to ownership and synchronization.

[rustbot]

r? @jackh726

rustbot has assigned @jackh726.
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

Why was this reviewer chosen?

The reviewer was selected based on:

• Owners of files modified in this PR: compiler
• compiler expanded to 69 candidates
• Random selection from 12 candidates

[petrochenkov]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 64fb35f (64fb35fbcee90871be9b0d2edc78438c95622fdf, parent: 14196dbfa3eb7c30195251eac092b1b86c8a2d84)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (64fb35f): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.3%	[0.3%, 0.3%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.1%	[-0.1%, -0.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

Results (primary 5.1%, secondary 9.8%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	8.8%	[4.8%, 11.4%]	6
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	15.8%	[4.8%, 26.9%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.2%	[-2.8%, -1.5%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	5.1%	[-2.8%, 11.4%]	9

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 491.114s -> 489.595s (-0.31%)
Artifact size: 394.23 MiB -> 394.31 MiB (0.02%)