[clang] [Clang][SVE2.1] Make a part of the name optional for `svwhileXX` builtins with predicate-as-counter (PR #75200)

[Momchil Velikov via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -1,12 +1,20 @@
 // NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_cc_test_checks.py
 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple aarch64-none-linux-gnu -target-feature +sve2p1 -S -O1 -Werror -Wall -emit-llvm -o - %s | FileCheck %s
 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple aarch64-none-linux-gnu -target-feature +sve2p1 -S -O1 -Werror -Wall -emit-llvm -o - -x c++ %s | FileCheck %s -check-prefix=CPP-CHECK
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -DSVE_OVERLOADED_FORMS -triple aarch64-none-linux-gnu -target-feature +sve2p1 -S -O1 -Werror -Wall -emit-llvm -o - %s | FileCheck %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -DSVE_OVERLOADED_FORMS -triple aarch64-none-linux-gnu -target-feature +sve2p1 -S -O1 -Werror -Wall -emit-llvm -o - -x c++ %s | FileCheck %s -check-prefix=CPP-CHECK
 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple aarch64-none-linux-gnu -target-feature +sve2p1 -S -disable-O0-optnone -Werror -Wall -o /dev/null %s
----------------
momchil-velikov wrote:

Yes, we do. I'll add it.

Now a questions is do we need a copy of all RUN lines (so we have a set with "+sve2p1" and the same set but with "+sme")
Since the goal is to test this part 
```
let TargetGuard = "sve2p1|sme2 in { ...
```
I would just change a single run line to use "+sme2" and consider that to provide enough test coverage (even though, strictly speaking, someone could move just one line outside that braces).
My problem is that running tests already takes unreasonable amount of time, so I'd rather not make it worse.

Thoughts?


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/75200