Index: lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopUnrollPeel.cpp
===================================================================
--- lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopUnrollPeel.cpp
+++ lib/Transforms/Utils/LoopUnrollPeel.cpp
@@ -618,8 +618,12 @@
       assert(DT->verify(DominatorTree::VerificationLevel::Fast));
     }
 
-    updateBranchWeights(InsertBot, cast<BranchInst>(VMap[LatchBR]), Iter,
+    auto *LatchBRCopy = cast<BranchInst>(VMap[LatchBR]);
+    updateBranchWeights(InsertBot, LatchBRCopy, Iter,
                         PeelCount, ExitWeight);
+    // Remove Loop metadata from the latch branch instruction
+    // because it is not the Loop's latch branch anymore.
+    LatchBRCopy->setMetadata(LLVMContext::MD_loop, nullptr);
 
     InsertTop = InsertBot;
     InsertBot = SplitBlock(InsertBot, InsertBot->getTerminator(), DT, LI);
Index: test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/peel-loop-conditions.ll
===================================================================
--- test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/peel-loop-conditions.ll
+++ test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/peel-loop-conditions.ll
@@ -82,12 +82,14 @@
 for.inc:
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end, !llvm.loop !1
 
 for.end:
   ret void
 }
 
+!1 = distinct !{!1}
+
 ; Check we peel off the maximum number of iterations that make conditions true.
 define void @test2(i32 %k) {
 ; CHECK-LABEL: @test2(
@@ -233,12 +235,14 @@
 for.inc:
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end, !llvm.loop !2
 
 for.end:
   ret void
 }
 
+!2 = distinct !{!2}
+
 ; Check that we can peel off iterations that make a condition false.
 define void @test3(i32 %k) {
 ; CHECK-LABEL: @test3(
@@ -332,12 +336,14 @@
 for.inc:
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end, !llvm.loop !3
 
 for.end:
   ret void
 }
 
+!3 = distinct !{!3}
+
 ; Test that we only peel off iterations if it simplifies a condition in the
 ; loop body after peeling at most MaxPeelCount iterations.
 define void @test4(i32 %k) {
@@ -373,12 +379,14 @@
 for.inc:
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end, !llvm.loop !4
 
 for.end:
   ret void
 }
 
+!4 = distinct !{!4}
+
 ; In this case we cannot peel the inner loop, because the condition involves
 ; the outer induction variable.
 define void @test5(i32 %k) {
@@ -432,18 +440,21 @@
 for.inc:
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %outer.inc
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %outer.inc, !llvm.loop !5
 
 outer.inc:
   %j.inc = add nsw i32 %j, 1
   %outer.cmp = icmp slt i32 %j.inc, %k
-  br i1 %outer.cmp, label %outer.header, label %for.end
+  br i1 %outer.cmp, label %outer.header, label %for.end, !llvm.loop !6
 
 
 for.end:
   ret void
 }
 
+!5 = distinct !{!5}
+!6 = distinct !{!6}
+
 ; In this test, the condition involves 2 AddRecs. Without evaluating both
 ; AddRecs, we cannot prove that the condition becomes known in the loop body
 ; after peeling.
@@ -491,12 +502,14 @@
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 2
   %j.inc = add nsw i32 %j, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end, !llvm.loop !7
 
 for.end:
   ret void
 }
 
+!7 = distinct !{!7}
+
 define void @test7(i32 %k) {
 ; FIXME: Could simplify loop body by peeling one additional iteration after
 ;        i != 3 becomes false
@@ -532,12 +545,14 @@
 for.inc:
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end, !llvm.loop !8
 
 for.end:
   ret void
 }
 
+!8 = distinct !{!8}
+
 define void @test8(i32 %k) {
 ; FIXME: Could simplify loop body by peeling one additional iteration after
 ;        i == 3 becomes true.
@@ -573,12 +588,14 @@
 for.inc:
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end, !llvm.loop !9
 
 for.end:
   ret void
 }
 
+!9 = distinct !{!9}
+
 ; Comparison with non-monotonic predicate due to possible wrapping, loop
 ; body cannot be simplified.
 define void @test9(i32 %k) {
@@ -614,8 +631,10 @@
 for.inc:
   %inc = add i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.end, !llvm.loop !10
 
 for.end:
   ret void
 }
+
+!10 = distinct !{!10}
Index: test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/peel-loop.ll
===================================================================
--- test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/peel-loop.ll
+++ test/Transforms/LoopUnroll/peel-loop.ll
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
   store i32 %i.05, i32* %p.addr.04, align 4
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.cond.for.end_crit_edge
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.cond.for.end_crit_edge, !llvm.loop !1
 
 for.cond.for.end_crit_edge:                       ; preds = %for.body
   br label %for.end
@@ -46,6 +46,8 @@
   ret void
 }
 
+!1 = distinct !{!1}
+
 ; Make sure peeling works correctly when a value defined in a loop is used
 ; in later code - we need to correctly plumb the phi depending on which
 ; iteration is actually used.
@@ -84,7 +86,7 @@
   store i32 %i.05, i32* %p.addr.04, align 4
   %inc = add nsw i32 %i.05, 1
   %cmp = icmp slt i32 %inc, %k
-  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.cond.for.end_crit_edge
+  br i1 %cmp, label %for.body, label %for.cond.for.end_crit_edge, !llvm.loop !2
 
 for.cond.for.end_crit_edge:                       ; preds = %for.body
   br label %for.end
@@ -93,3 +95,5 @@
   %ret = phi i32 [ 0, %entry], [ %inc, %for.cond.for.end_crit_edge ]
   ret i32 %ret
 }
+
+!2 = distinct !{!2}