[no-cycle] a possible reason of the performance issue

I noticed that many issues have reported the performance degradation issue with no-cycle. I wasn't sure which issue to comment my findings, so I decided to open a new one.

Relevant issues:
* https://github.com/import-js/eslint-plugin-import/issues/3148
* https://github.com/import-js/eslint-plugin-import/issues/3047
* https://github.com/import-js/eslint-plugin-import/issues/3060
* https://github.com/import-js/eslint-plugin-import/issues/3113

# Reason

`disableScc: false` always traverse the files in node_modules if:
* `import/extensions` or `import/parsers[parser]` allow the extensions of the files in node_modules (like `.js`, `.jsx`)
* `import/ignore` doesn't contain `node_modules`

`ignoreExternal: true` doesn't work with `disableScc: false`

# Possible Solution

make `ignoreExternal: true` work with `disableScc: false`

# Tests

`maxDepth` is set to `∞`

1. `disableScc: false`, `ignoreExternal: false`, `import/ignore` doesn't contain `node_modules`

```
Rule | Time (ms) | Relative
:---------------------------------------|----------:|--------:
import/no-cycle | 12518.457 | 87.0%
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-assignment | 624.835 | 4.3%
prettier/prettier | 476.463 | 3.3%
@typescript-eslint/no-misused-promises | 81.059 | 0.6%
import/no-relative-packages | 80.742 | 0.6%
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-return | 74.946 | 0.5%
import/order | 64.003 | 0.4%
import/no-duplicates | 51.688 | 0.4%
import/no-self-import | 41.741 | 0.3%
@typescript-eslint/naming-convention | 37.769 | 0.3%
```

2. `disableScc: false`, `ignoreExternal: true`, `import/ignore` doesn't contain `node_modules`

```
Rule | Time (ms) | Relative
:---------------------------------------|----------:|--------:
import/no-cycle | 12802.937 | 87.4%
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-assignment | 619.635 | 4.2%
prettier/prettier | 477.088 | 3.3%
import/no-relative-packages | 79.608 | 0.5%
@typescript-eslint/no-misused-promises | 73.669 | 0.5%
import/order | 60.475 | 0.4%
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-return | 51.776 | 0.4%
@typescript-eslint/naming-convention | 47.074 | 0.3%
import/no-duplicates | 46.995 | 0.3%
import/no-self-import | 43.525 | 0.3%
```

3. `disableScc: false`, `ignoreExternal: true`, `import/ignore` contains `node_modules`

```

Rule | Time (ms) | Relative
:---------------------------------------|----------:|--------:
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-assignment | 661.048 | 26.5%
import/no-cycle | 563.195 | 22.5%
prettier/prettier | 493.190 | 19.7%
import/no-relative-packages | 81.750 | 3.3%
@typescript-eslint/no-misused-promises | 77.599 | 3.1%
import/order | 62.108 | 2.5%
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-return | 51.690 | 2.1%
import/no-duplicates | 50.320 | 2.0%
import/no-self-import | 45.716 | 1.8%
@typescript-eslint/naming-convention | 40.678 | 1.6%
```

4. `disableScc: true`, `ignoreExternal: false`

```
Rule | Time (ms) | Relative
:---------------------------------------|----------:|--------:
import/no-cycle | 35442.592 | 94.9%
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-assignment | 601.643 | 1.6%
prettier/prettier | 513.087 | 1.4%
import/no-relative-packages | 81.385 | 0.2%
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-return | 76.666 | 0.2%
@typescript-eslint/no-misused-promises | 75.370 | 0.2%
import/order | 60.338 | 0.2%
import/no-duplicates | 57.670 | 0.2%
import/no-self-import | 44.472 | 0.1%
@typescript-eslint/naming-convention | 42.661 | 0.1%
```

5. `disableScc: true`, `ignoreExternal: true`

```
Rule | Time (ms) | Relative
:---------------------------------------|----------:|--------:
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-assignment | 667.579 | 26.3%
import/no-cycle | 570.987 | 22.5%
prettier/prettier | 500.888 | 19.8%
@typescript-eslint/no-misused-promises | 83.531 | 3.3%
import/no-relative-packages | 79.151 | 3.1%
import/order | 63.131 | 2.5%
@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-return | 53.353 | 2.1%
import/no-duplicates | 49.024 | 1.9%
import/no-self-import | 46.231 | 1.8%
@typescript-eslint/naming-convention | 43.361 | 1.7%
```

From above tests, we can see a huge performance improvement from `disableScc: true, ignoreExternal: false` to `disableScc: false, ignoreExternal: false`. However `ignoreExternal` doesn't work with `disableScc: false` thus `disableScc: false` performs worse than `disableScc: true, ignoreExternal: true`

# Reproduce Steps

1. `git clone https://github.com/yifanwww/easy-projs.git`
2. `git checkout chore/eslint-no-cycle`
3. `pnpm install`
4. do a basic build: `pnpm run build`
5. check configs\eslint-config\src\rules\eslint.ts, change no-cycle config, then `pnpm run --filter @easy-config/eslint-config build`
6. `pnpm run --filter @easy-proj/webapp lint` with `TIMING=0`
# Limits

I don't have a large enough project to benchmark the performance, so I'm not sure whether the conclusion above would still hold for very large projects.

Start with the no-cycle configuration and implementation entry points referenced by the issue, using configs\eslint-config\src\rules\eslint.ts and the provided easy-projs reproduction. Compare the listed disableScc and ignoreExternal runs, then verify that ignoreExternal is effective with disableScc false without traversing the reported node_modules files and that the no-cycle timing improves.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.