This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: peephole2: dead regs not marked as dead

From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
To: Joern Rennecke <amylaar at spamcop dot net>
Cc: Georg Lay <avr at gjlay dot de>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 12:40:58 +0100
Subject: Re: peephole2: dead regs not marked as dead
References: <4CC00268.1020803@gjlay.de> <mcrvd4v1inv.fsf@google.com> <4CC1729C.1030601@gjlay.de> <4CC93592.9060804@gnu.org> <4CC96A31.8030507@gjlay.de> <4CC97656.1060701@gjlay.de> <4CC9C7A0.5090507@gnu.org> <4CCAE383.5070605@gjlay.de> <4CCAE571.1030601@gnu.org> <4CCAF3BF.10509@gjlay.de> <4CCAF81D.5040304@gnu.org> <4CCFDCDD.6010901@gjlay.de> <4CCFE531.9080806@gnu.org> <20101102073652.12idhqx1bkso08c8-nzlynne@webmail.spamcop.net>

On 11/02/2010 12:36 PM, Joern Rennecke wrote:


define_insn_and_split is little more than syntactic sugar to avoid
re-typing the same patterns again.

Yes, on the other hand it was introduced as combiner-splitter patterns fell out of fashion, substantially replaced by what you call combiner bridge patterns.

peephole2 operates only after register allocation, and then it might
be too late to fix up some pessimizations perpetrated by the
machine-independent passes.

Agreed, that's why I recommended Georg against it.

Paolo

References:
- Re: peephole2: dead regs not marked as dead
  - From: Georg Lay
- Re: peephole2: dead regs not marked as dead
  - From: Paolo Bonzini
- Re: peephole2: dead regs not marked as dead
  - From: Joern Rennecke

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]