Index: llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
===================================================================
--- llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
+++ llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Scalar/Reassociate.cpp
@@ -1894,6 +1894,8 @@
         Op = Op->user_back();
       RedoInsts.insert(Op);
     }
+
+  MadeChange = true;
 }
 
 // Canonicalize expressions of the following form:
Index: llvm/trunk/test/Transforms/Reassociate/erase_inst_made_change.ll
===================================================================
--- llvm/trunk/test/Transforms/Reassociate/erase_inst_made_change.ll
+++ llvm/trunk/test/Transforms/Reassociate/erase_inst_made_change.ll
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+; RUN: opt < %s -inline -reassociate -S | FileCheck %s
+
+; This test case exposed a bug in reassociate where EraseInst's
+; removal of a dead call wasn't recognized as changing the IR.
+; So when runOnFunction propagated the "made changes" upwards
+; to the CallGraphSCCPass it signalled that no changes had been
+; made, so CallGraphSCCPass assumed that the old CallGraph,
+; as known by that pass manager, still was up-to-date.
+;
+; This was detected as an assert when trying to remove the
+; no longer used function 'bar' (due to incorrect reference
+; count in the CallGraph).
+
+define void @foo() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: @foo(
+; CHECK-NEXT:  entry:
+; CHECK-NEXT:    ret void
+entry:
+  call void @bar()
+  ret void
+}
+
+define internal void @bar() noinline nounwind readnone {
+; CHECK-NOT: bar
+entry:
+  ret void
+}
+
+