[clang] [NFC][Clang] Address reviews about overrideFunctionFeaturesWithTargetFeatures (PR #65938)

[Juan Manuel Martinez Caamaño via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ int bar() { return no_attr() + attr_in_target() + attr_not_in_target() + attr_in
 // CHECK-LABEL: @attr_incompatible
 // CHECK-SAME: () #[[ATTR_INCOMPATIBLE:[0-9]+]] {
 
-// CHECK: attributes #[[ATTR_BAR]] = { noinline nounwind optnone "no-trapping-math"="true" "stack-protector-buffer-size"="8" "target-cpu"="gfx90a" "target-features"="+16-bit-insts,+atomic-buffer-global-pk-add-f16-insts,+atomic-fadd-rtn-insts,+ci-insts,+dl-insts,+dot1-insts,+dot10-insts,+dot2-insts,+dot3-insts,+dot4-insts,+dot5-insts,+dot6-insts,+dot7-insts,+dpp,+gfx8-insts,+gfx9-insts,+gfx90a-insts,+mai-insts,+s-memrealtime,+s-memtime-inst,+wavefrontsize64" }
-// CHECK: attributes #[[ATTR_COMPATIBLE]] = { convergent noinline nounwind optnone "no-trapping-math"="true" "stack-protector-buffer-size"="8" "target-cpu"="gfx90a" "target-features"="+16-bit-insts,+atomic-buffer-global-pk-add-f16-insts,+atomic-fadd-rtn-insts,+ci-insts,+dl-insts,+dot1-insts,+dot10-insts,+dot2-insts,+dot3-insts,+dot4-insts,+dot5-insts,+dot6-insts,+dot7-insts,+dpp,+gfx8-insts,+gfx9-insts,+gfx90a-insts,+gws,+image-insts,+mai-insts,+s-memrealtime,+s-memtime-inst,+wavefrontsize64" }
-// CHECK: attributes #[[ATTR_EXTEND]] = { convergent noinline nounwind optnone "no-trapping-math"="true" "stack-protector-buffer-size"="8" "target-cpu"="gfx90a" "target-features"="+extended-image-insts,+16-bit-insts,+atomic-buffer-global-pk-add-f16-insts,+atomic-fadd-rtn-insts,+ci-insts,+dl-insts,+dot1-insts,+dot10-insts,+dot2-insts,+dot3-insts,+dot4-insts,+dot5-insts,+dot6-insts,+dot7-insts,+dpp,+gfx8-insts,+gfx9-insts,+gfx90a-insts,+gws,+image-insts,+mai-insts,+s-memrealtime,+s-memtime-inst,+wavefrontsize64" }
-// CHECK: attributes #[[ATTR_INCOMPATIBLE]] = { convergent noinline nounwind optnone "no-trapping-math"="true" "stack-protector-buffer-size"="8" "target-cpu"="gfx90a" "target-features"="-gfx9-insts,+16-bit-insts,+atomic-buffer-global-pk-add-f16-insts,+atomic-fadd-rtn-insts,+ci-insts,+dl-insts,+dot1-insts,+dot10-insts,+dot2-insts,+dot3-insts,+dot4-insts,+dot5-insts,+dot6-insts,+dot7-insts,+dpp,+gfx8-insts,+gfx90a-insts,+gws,+image-insts,+mai-insts,+s-memrealtime,+s-memtime-inst,+wavefrontsize64" }
+// CHECK: attributes #[[ATTR_BAR]] = { {{.*}} }
+// CHECK: attributes #[[ATTR_COMPATIBLE]] = { {{.*}} }
+// CHECK: attributes #[[ATTR_EXTEND]] = { convergent noinline nounwind optnone "no-trapping-math"="true" "stack-protector-buffer-size"="8" "target-cpu"="gfx90a" "target-features"="+16-bit-insts,+atomic-buffer-global-pk-add-f16-insts,+atomic-fadd-rtn-insts,+ci-insts,+dl-insts,+dot1-insts,+dot10-insts,+dot2-insts,+dot3-insts,+dot4-insts,+dot5-insts,+dot6-insts,+dot7-insts,+dpp,+extended-image-insts,+gfx8-insts,+gfx9-insts,+gfx90a-insts,+gws,+image-insts,+mai-insts,+s-memrealtime,+s-memtime-inst,+wavefrontsize64" }
----------------
jmmartinez wrote:

I've updated the test to match that behaviour.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/65938