Auto merge of #88019 - inquisitivecrystal:macro-def, r=cjgillot

Treat macros as HIR items

Macros have historically been treated differently from other items at the HIR level. This PR makes them just like normal items. There are a few special cases left over, which I've attempted to lay out below. By normalizing the treatment of macro items, this PR simplifies a fair bit of code and fixes some bugs at the same time. For more information, see #87406.

r? `@cjgillot`

## Backwards incompatibility

This is backwards incompatible in one small way. Due to a mistake, it was previously possible to apply stability attributes to an exported macro, even without enabling the `staged_api` feature. This never should have worked. After this PR, it will error, as it should. We could make it a warning instead, but that would require a special case for a feature that shouldn't ever have worked and is likely used by no or very few crates, so I'm not thrilled about the idea.

## Notes for reviewers
### Commit seperation

I'd recommend reviewing this PR commit by commit. The commit chunking wasn't perfect, but it's better than looking at the combined diff, which is quite overwhelming. The compiler and standard library build after each commit, although tests do not necessarily pass and tools do not necessarily build till the end of the series.

### Special cases
There are a few special cases that remain after this change. Here are the notable ones I remember:

1. Visibility works a bit differently for `macro_rules!` macros than other items, since they aren't generally marked with `pub` but instead with `#[macro_export]`.
2. Since `#[macro_export]` macros always have paths at the top level of the crate, some additional handling needs to be done on the reexport to top level.
### Performance impact

I don't know for sure, but theses changes may slightly hurt performance. They create more work for the compiler in a few places. For instance, some operations that were previously run only for exported macros are now run for all macros. A perf run is probably advisable. For all I know we'll see performance improvements instead. :)

## Issues resolved

This resolves #87406 (the tracking issue for this change). It also fixes several bugs:

Fixes #59306.
Fixes #73754.
Fixes #87257.