[SandboxIR] Implemented isVolatile() for LoadInst

[wizardengineer]

as titled stated

cc: @vporpo

[github-actions]

Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!

This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be
notified.

If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page.

If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write
permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by
name in a comment by using @ followed by their GitHub username.

If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review
by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate
is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers.

If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide.

You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums.

[vporpo]

Now that we can check isVolatile() we can also add a new LoadInst::create() function with a bool isVolatile argument. But this can be a separate PR.

[wizardengineer]

@vporpo added the fix :)

[vporpo]

Looks good, thanks!

[wizardengineer]

Now that we can check isVolatile() we can also add a new LoadInst::create() function with a bool isVolatile argument. But this can be a separate PR.

@vporpo working on it now, should i include the body of the function too or will the function header alone suffice for now?

[vporpo]

should i include the body of the function too or will the function header alone suffice for now?
I think you should include the body too + test it.
The best way to implement this is probably to add the isVolatile argument to the existing create() functions, then add new create() functions that look just like the existing ones (without the isVolatile argument) and in their bodies call the ones with the argument but set it to false.

[wizardengineer]

@aeubanks @tmsri is this good to merge?

[vporpo]

@aeubanks @tmsri is this good to merge?

Go ahead, it looks good.

[tmsri]

LGTM

[wizardengineer]

Go ahead, it looks good.

@vporpo I don't have write access, you guys will have to

[vporpo]

Ah OK, let me merge it then.

[github-actions]

@medievalghoul Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project!

Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested
by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may receive a report in an email or a comment on this PR.

Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as
the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your
change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or
infrastructure issues.

How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here.

If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself.
This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again.

If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done!

[vporpo]

There is some trailing whitespace in two lines. I will push a fix, but why didn't the format checker bot catch it? Or did I miss it?