Re: Additional peephole pass(es)

[Oleg Endo <oleg.endo@t-online.de>]

On Fri, 2020-04-24 at 16:36 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> 
> In combine itself runs split as well (one insn to two).  And you can
> add instruction patterns to your machine description that are only there
> for combine: you split them to separate insns immediately again (maybe
> this is what you meant though?)

No, that's not what I meant.  What I meant was really custom "combine-
like" steps which combine would never do by itself.  split1 gives you a
simple "interface" to hook into each insn without writing a full custom
pass.

For example, on SH I've used that to implement additional elimination
of sign/zero extending memory loads.  On RX I did the same to fold some
in-memory operations, which neither combine nor peephole passes would
catch otherwise.

> Another big problem is that it is very, very hard to write a *correct*
> (non-trivial) peephole2.
> 

I agree.  Combine patterns are easier to deal with.

Cheers,
Oleg