compiler-gcc.h: Define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ under hwaddress sanitizer

compiler-gcc.h: Define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ under hwaddress sanitizer

When Clang is using the hwaddress sanitizer, it sets __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
explicitly:

 #if __has_feature(address_sanitizer) || __has_feature(hwaddress_sanitizer)
 /* Emulate GCC's __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ flag */
 #define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
 #endif

Once hwaddress sanitizer was added to GCC, however, a separate define
was created, __SANITIZE_HWADDRESS__. The kernel is expecting to find
__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ in either case, though, and the existing string
macros break on supported architectures:

 #if (defined(CONFIG_KASAN_GENERIC) || defined(CONFIG_KASAN_SW_TAGS)) && \
          !defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)

where as other architectures (like arm32) have no idea about hwaddress
sanitizer and just check for __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__:

 #if defined(CONFIG_KASAN) && !defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)

This would lead to compiler foritfy self-test warnings when building
with CONFIG_KASAN_SW_TAGS=y:

warning: unsafe memmove() usage lacked '__read_overflow2' symbol in lib/test_fortify/read_overflow2-memmove.c
warning: unsafe memcpy() usage lacked '__write_overflow' symbol in lib/test_fortify/write_overflow-memcpy.c
...

Sort this out by also defining __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ in GCC under the
hwaddress sanitizer.

Suggested-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Cc: llvm@lists.linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211020200039.170424-1-keescook@chromium.org