JVM_IR: assume function reference adapters are tail-call

Meaning, they never need continuation objects. This shouldn't affect
correctness (if the assumption is valid, the continuation object
should always have been removed in the end), but the phantom
continuation sometimes left behind unused accessors (and in case of
inline function references, those accessors would refer to non-existent
functions) - see the modified test and Kotlin/kotlinx.coroutines#2769.

compiler/testData/codegen/box/coroutines/suspendConversion/onInlineArgument_ir.txt

@@ -8,7 +8,6 @@ final class OnInlineArgumentKt$box$1 {
     field label: int
     inner (anonymous) class OnInlineArgumentKt$box$1
     method <init>(p0: kotlin.jvm.internal.Ref$ObjectRef, p1: kotlin.jvm.functions.Function1, p2: kotlin.coroutines.Continuation): void
-    public synthetic final static method access$invokeSuspend$suspendConversion0(p0: kotlin.jvm.functions.Function1, p1: java.lang.String, p2: kotlin.coroutines.Continuation): java.lang.Object
     public final @org.jetbrains.annotations.NotNull method create(@org.jetbrains.annotations.NotNull p0: kotlin.coroutines.Continuation): kotlin.coroutines.Continuation
     public final @org.jetbrains.annotations.Nullable method invoke(@org.jetbrains.annotations.Nullable p0: kotlin.coroutines.Continuation): java.lang.Object
     public synthetic bridge method invoke(p0: java.lang.Object): java.lang.Object