This test caught my attention because it's the only one in JITLink that XFAILs. Running it in isolation showed that the output doesn't meet the CHECK-LINES, i.e. the block address didn't match:
```
error: CHECK-NEXT: expected string not found in input
CHECK-NEXT: block 0xfff02000 size = 0x00000001, align = 16, alignment-offset = 0
<stdin>:22:2: note: possible intended match here
block 0xfff01000 size = 0x00000001, align = 16, alignment-offset = 0
```
Though, that doesn't appear to be the reason the test XFAILs. What we really want to check here is that llvm-jitlink doesn't fail with a duplicate section error yet.
In order to avoid issues like this in the future we can match a placeholder to check for some valid address within the slab (64Kb == last 4 digits).
The patch also drops the duplicate -noexec argument, removes an empty RUN-line, fixes indentation and adds a newline at EOF.
Reviewed By: sunho
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D137148
dc9854d4e9