Be conservative about unordered accesses for the moment

Be conservative about unordered accesses for the moment

Background: As described in https://reviews.llvm.org/D57601, I'm working towards separating volatile and atomic in the MMO uses for atomic instructions.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D57593, I fixed a bug where isUnordered was returning the wrong result, but didn't account for the fact I was getting slightly ahead of myself. While both uses of isUnordered are correct (as far as I can tell), we don't have tests to demonstrate this and being aggressive gets in the way of having the removal of volatile truly be non-functional. Once D57601 lands, I will return to these call sites, revert this patch, and add the appropriate tests to show the expected behaviour.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57802

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@353766 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8