Eliminate 280-byte memset from ReadDir iterator
This guy:
1536ab1b38/library/std/src/sys/unix/fs.rs (L589)
It turns out `libc::dirent64` is quite big—https://docs.rs/libc/0.2.135/libc/struct.dirent64.html. In #103135 this memset accounted for 0.9% of the runtime of iterating a big directory.
Almost none of the big zeroed value is ever used. We memcpy a tiny prefix (19 bytes) into it, and then read just 9 bytes (`d_ino` and `d_type`) back out. We can read exactly those 9 bytes we need directly from the original entry_ptr instead.
## History
This code got added in #93459 and tweaked in #94272 and #94750.
Prior to #93459, there was no memset but a full 280 bytes were being copied from the entry_ptr.
<table><tr><td>copy 280 bytes</td></tr></table>
This was not legal because not all of those bytes might be initialized, or even allocated, depending on the length of the directory entry's name, leading to a segfault. That PR fixed the segfault by creating a new zeroed dirent64 and copying just the guaranteed initialized prefix into it.
<table><tr><td>memset 280 bytes</td><td>copy 19 bytes</td></tr></table>
However this was still buggy because it used `addr_of!((*entry_ptr).d_name)`, which is considered UB by Miri in the case that the full extent of entry_ptr is not in bounds of the same allocation. (Arguably this shouldn't be a requirement, but here we are.)
The UB got fixed by #94272 by replacing `addr_of` with some pointer manipulation based on `offset_from`, but still fundamentally the same operation.
<table><tr><td>memset 280 bytes</td><td>copy 19 bytes</td></tr></table>
Then #94750 noticed that only 9 of those 19 bytes were even being used, so we could pick out only those 9 to put in the ReadDir value.
<table><tr><td>memset 280 bytes</td><td>copy 19 bytes</td><td>copy 9 bytes</td></tr></table>
After my PR we just grab the 9 needed bytes directly from entry_ptr.
<table><tr><td>copy 9 bytes</td></tr></table>
The resulting code is more complex but I believe still worthwhile to land for the following reason. This is an extremely straightforward thing to accomplish in C and clearly libc assumes that; literally just `entry_ptr->d_name`. The extra work in comparison to accomplish it in Rust is not an example of any actual safety being provided by Rust. I believe it's useful to have uncovered that and think about what could be done in the standard library or language to support this obvious operation better.
## References
- https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/readdir.3.html
7fcf850d79