[llvm] Reapply "[llvm-exegesis] Exclude loads/stores from aliasing instruction set" (#156735) (PR #159366)

[Sjoerd Meijer via llvm-commits]

sjoerdmeijer wrote:

Hi @boomanaiden154, I had to revert a previous because I broke all the x86 bots. I have reverted the implementation back to one of my first versions, and have hoisted the extra checks out of `hasMemoryOperands` function. As I wrote in the comments, I hit problems with X86 instructions that don't have any operands, so that would require checks at the call sites of `hasMemoryOperands`, and I thought it was just easier to filter the mayLoad and mayStore here.

After breaking all the x86 bots, I released that there are actually quite a few x86 regression tests that involve running and evaluating latency/throughput measurements and thus running it on hardware. I am on a non-x86 platform, do have the X86 backend built, but realised that I am not running those test when I develop locally, so that was a little lesson learned.  

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/159366