Worse optimization with `fn() -> !` than `fn()` or `fn() -> ()` with `-Crelocation-model=static`

I tried this code with the following flags: -O -Crelocation-model=static, with the target being i686-unknown-linux-gnu (similar things happened with other targets that I checked, including x86-unknown-linux-gnu)

#[unsafe(no_mangle)]
fn base(ptr: fn()) {
    ptr();
}

#[unsafe(no_mangle)]
fn worse(ptr: fn() -> !) {
    ptr();
}

I expected to see this happen: The assembly of those programs are equal, or worse() is better because more is known by the compiler

Instead, this happened:
The assembly for worse() used 16 more bytes of stack for no reason

base:
        jmp     dword ptr [esp + 4]

worse:
        sub     esp, 12
        call    dword ptr [esp + 16]

Note that the better code is also emitted if the fn ptr returns ().

rustc --version --verbose:

rustc 1.96.0-nightly (1d8897a4e 2026-03-13)
binary: rustc
commit-hash: 1d8897a4e88051480b36c501e66809425c6e08ad
commit-date: 2026-03-13
host: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
release: 1.96.0-nightly
LLVM version: 22.1.0

Also happens on 1.94

Start by compiling the reported base and worse functions with -O -Crelocation-model=static for i686-unknown-linux-gnu, then compare their generated assembly. Investigate the compiler path handling function pointers returning !; done when worse() no longer uses unnecessary stack space and a regression test covers the behavior.