refactor: replace &PathBuf with &Path to enhance generality

[Integral-Tech]

• According to style.md:

More generally, always prefer types on the left

// GOOD      BAD
&[T]         &Vec<T>
&str         &String
Option<&T>   &Option<T>
&Path        &PathBuf

[rustbot]

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @compiler-errors (or someone else) some time within the next two weeks.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information. Namely, in order to ensure the minimum review times lag, PR authors and assigned reviewers should ensure that the review label (S-waiting-on-review and S-waiting-on-author) stays updated, invoking these commands when appropriate:

• @rustbot author: the review is finished, PR author should check the comments and take action accordingly
• @rustbot review: the author is ready for a review, this PR will be queued again in the reviewer's queue

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest

cc @jieyouxu

Some changes occurred in src/tools/rustfmt

cc @rust-lang/rustfmt

This PR modifies src/bootstrap/src/core/config.

If appropriate, please update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/utils/change_tracker.rs.

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in src/tools/rustfmt

cc @rust-lang/rustfmt

Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest

cc @jieyouxu

This PR modifies src/bootstrap/src/core/config.

If appropriate, please update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/utils/change_tracker.rs.

[compiler-errors]

Hi. Thanks for the contribution, but please revert changes to subtrees like rustfmt.

[Integral-Tech]

@compiler-errors Done :)

[compiler-errors]

Generally I want to discourage using the rust-analyzer style guide to make basically non-functional changes to rust-lang/rust, but since this is already done I'll approve it.

@bors r+ rollup

[bors]

📌 Commit 7eb0d84 has been approved by compiler-errors

It is now in the queue for this repository.