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: Combine or peephole?


 On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> combine requires a data dependency, so for this situation, combine isn't
> going to help. ?The easy solution is to create a peephole. ? ?You can also
> create a machine dependent reorg pass to detect more of these opportunities.
> Jeff
>


 Hi Jeff, et al,

 Thank you for your reply. Two more questions:

 1. Is it possible to add a machine dependent reorg pass at backend
 level without changing the standard infrastructure? If so, can you
 please point me such example? If no, may the new plugin architecture
 help here?
 2. A peephole for such case just repeats instruction definition
 pattern. As all information already available for such peephole,
 wouldn’t it be useful to implement the pass to be a part of the
 standard infrastructure?

 Thank you,
 Frank


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