Related articles |
---|
How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions amker.cheng@gmail.com (Amker.Cheng) (2011-10-31) |
Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions kaz@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2011-10-31) |
Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2011-11-01) |
Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2011-11-01) |
Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions can.finner@gmail.com (amker) (2011-11-01) |
Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions can.finner@gmail.com (amker) (2011-11-01) |
Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions can.finner@gmail.com (amker) (2011-11-01) |
[12 later articles] |
From: | "Amker.Cheng" <amker.cheng@gmail.com> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:53:46 +0800 |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
Keywords: | optimize, question |
Posted-Date: | 31 Oct 2011 10:49:58 EDT |
Hi,
I found following intermediate codes are generated in gcc
rx <- 0
...
use rx
...
ry <- 0
use ry
...
It's normally a result of const propagation.
After register allocation, It is likely rx/ry get allocated into
different hard registers.
Thus in final codes, there would be a redundant "move 0" instruction.
The story even stands for Os compiling, so the question is:
Is there any optimization technique dedicates to this kind of case?
Or is it normally handled by other optimizations as sub task?
Thanks very much.
--
Best Regards.
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.