Re: [Patch]: Update bb->count to avoid erroneous partitioning decisions

[Christian Bruel]

> OK,
> is bb1 going to die?  If not, probably bb1->count = 0 should be there, if so,
> then the bb1->frequency = 0 is redundant.

Agree, we do 'delete_basic_block (bb1)' and the frequency is not used in
between, so the setting to 0 seems unnecessary.

testing it:

Index: tree-ssa-tail-merge.c
===================================================================
--- tree-ssa-tail-merge.c       (revision 193283)
+++ tree-ssa-tail-merge.c       (working copy)
@@ -1488,8 +1488,9 @@ replace_block_by (basic_block bb1, basic_block bb2
   bb2->frequency += bb1->frequency;
   if (bb2->frequency > BB_FREQ_MAX)
     bb2->frequency = BB_FREQ_MAX;
-  bb1->frequency = 0;

+  bb2->count += bb1->count;
+
   /* Do updates that use bb1, before deleting bb1.  */
   release_last_vdef (bb1);
   same_succ_flush_bb (bb1);

OK when validation completes ?

thanks

Christian