IIUC, this workaround is for x86 to solve inconsistency between clang defined __GCC_ATOMIC_LLONG_LOCK_FREE(or __CLANG_ATOMIC_LLONG_LOCK_FREE) and __atomic_always_lock_free(8, 0), i.e., for x86 cpu >= i586, __GCC_ATOMIC_LLONG_LOCK_FREE equals to 1(sometimes-lockfree), but __atomic_always_lock_free(8, 0) returns true. See https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/31212.
This looks not an issue for powerpc.
It looks like this issue was fixed a long time ago. Do we need a workaround at all anymore? I would suggest removing the workaround entirely and seeing whether our CI passes.