[release/6.0-rc1] Update dependencies from mono/linker

[dotnet-maestro]

This pull request updates the following dependencies

From https://github.com/mono/linker

• Subscription: 3a4da6af-00c3-4c7a-2994-08d96284e872
• Build: 20210824.4
• Date Produced: 8/24/2021 5:50 PM
• Commit: edad7cbe1c568d299c196883de57fb5519fd6399
• Branch: refs/heads/release/6.0

• Updates:
  • Microsoft.NET.ILLink.Tasks: from 6.0.100-preview.6.21424.3 to 6.0.100-preview.6.21424.4

Issue descriptions

Backport of #2213 to release/6.0-rc1

Customer Impact
Linker will crash if types or members with DynamicallyAccessedMemberTypes are used in assembly attributes.

Testing
Unit tests

Risk
Low. The fix allows for the assembly as the source of linker diagnostics, which it didn't before.

--

Backport of #2213 to release/6.0-rc1

Customer Impact
Fixes IL corruption issues seen in dotnet/runtime. In many cases the invalid IL is accepted by the .NET runtime, but there may be cases where the runtime cannot JIT or produces incorrect machine code. Other runtimes, like Mono AOT, fail outright.

Testing
Unit tests, manual verification.

Risk
Low. The fix is constrained to fixing up scopes and branches. Cecil already doesn't handle this properly and the IL produced by a bug in the custom processor is unlikely to be worse than the IL Cecil already produces.

[ghost]

I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this PR. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label.

[agocke]

@jeffschwMSFT FYI, this contains the linker changes dotnet/linker#2220 and dotnet/linker#2219

[jeffschwMSFT]

Approved. Please get a code review and update the description with details of the issues.

[agocke]

@sbomer Could you double-check my work here, that this contains yours and Vitek's change?

[sbomer]

Confirmed that it has those two changes - LGTM.

[ViktorHofer]

Is this codeflow PR ready to be merged?

[jeffschwMSFT]

There are 2 issues fixed in this change that we are going to seek approval before merging.

[ViktorHofer]

There are 2 issues fixed in this change that we are going to seek approval before merging.

Just for my own education, aren't we usually approving changes in source repo's PRs and not in codeflow PRs? In this example, why didn't we seek approval for the two PRs directly in mono/linker?

[jeffschwMSFT]

We don't track mono/linker and this is not a very typical flow of late issues.