Add a new 'pc' option to -Z branch-protection for aarch64 that
enables the use of PC as a diversifier in PAC branch protection code.

When the pauth-lr target feature is enabled in combination
with -Z branch-protection=pac-ret,pc, the new 9.5-a instructions
(pacibsppc, retaasppc, etc) will be generated.

As asked in the FIXME comments

Fixes rust-lang#132483

Use the right span when encountering an enum variant followed by an associated item so we don't lose the associated item in the resulting code.

Do not suggest the thing twice, once as a removal of the associated item and a second time as a typo suggestion.

also move internal const_panic helpers to a better location

…-lr, r=davidtwco

rustc_codegen_llvm: Add a new 'pc' option to branch-protection

Add a new 'pc' option to -Z branch-protection for aarch64 that enables the use of PC as a diversifier in PAC branch protection code.

When the pauth-lr target feature is enabled in combination with -Z branch-protection=pac-ret,pc, the new 9.5-a instructions (pacibsppc, retaasppc, etc) will be generated.

…, r=Kobzol

CI: switch 7 linux jobs to free runners

try-job: x86_64-gnu-aux
try-job: x86_64-gnu-nopt
try-job: x86_64-gnu-tools

…s, r=estebank

Suggest fixing typos and let bindings at the same time

Fixes rust-lang#132483

Currently, a suggestion for adding a let binding won't be shown if we suggest fixing a typo. This changes that behavior to always show both, if possible. Essentially, this turns the suggestion from
```rust
error[E0425]: cannot find value `x2` in this scope
 --> src/main.rs:4:5
  |
4 |     x2 = 2;
  |     ^^ help: a local variable with a similar name exists: `x1`

For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0425`.
```

to
```rust
error[E0425]: cannot find value `x2` in this scope
 --> src/main.rs:4:5
  |
4 |     x2 = 2;
  |     ^^
  |
help: a local variable with a similar name exists
  |
4 |     x1 = 2;
  |     ~~
help: you might have meant to introduce a new binding
  |
4 |     let x2 = 2;
  |     +++

For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0425`.
```

for the following code:
```rust
fn main() {
    let x1 = 1;
    x2 = 2;
}
```

The original behavior only shows the suggestion for a let binding if a typo suggestion wasn't already displayed. However, this falls apart in the cases like the one above where we have multiple similar variables. I don't think it makes sense to hide this suggestion if there's a similar variable, since that defeats the purpose of this suggestion in that case (it's meant to help those coming from languages like Python).

…odule-exclusion-list-between-tidy-and-rustfmt, r=jieyouxu

chore(style): sync submodule exclusion list between tidy and rustfmt

As asked in the FIXME comments

Properly suggest `E::assoc` when we encounter `E::Variant::assoc`

Use the right span when encountering an enum variant followed by an associated item so we don't lose the associated item in the resulting code.

Do not suggest the thing twice, once as a removal of the associated item and a second time as a typo suggestion.

…r=oli-obk

add const_eval_select macro to reduce redundancy

I played around a bit with a macro to make const_eval_select invocations look a bit nicer and avoid repeating the argument lists. Here's what I got. What do you think?

I didn't apply this everywhere yet because I wanted to gather feedback first.

The second commit moves the macros from rust-lang#132542 into a more sensible place. It didn't seem worth its own PR and would conflict with this PR if done separately.

Cc ``@oli-obk`` ``@saethlin`` ``@tgross35``

try-job: dist-aarch64-msvc

Do not filter empty lint passes & re-do CTFE pass

Some structs implement `LintPass` without having a `Lint` associated with them rust-lang#125116 broke that behaviour by filtering them out. This PR ensures that lintless passes are not filtered out.

…er-errors

Add documentation on `ast::Attribute`

I was working again with attributes in clippy recently and I often find myself in need to read the source code to ensure it's doing what I want.

Instead, a bit of documentation would allow me (and hopefully others) to skip this step.