On Tue, 3 Apr 2018, Andrey Belevantsev wrote: > Hello, > > This issue ended up being fixed the way different from described in the PR. > We do not want to walk away from the invariant "zero SCHED_TIMES -- insn > is not scheduled" even for bookkeeping copies (testing showed it trips over > asserts designed to catch this). Rather we choose merging exprs in the way > the larger sched-times wins.
... but the Changelog and the actual patch take the average rather than the maximum sched-time? :) I believe either way would be acceptable, but please clarify the intent. Alexander
