On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 08:50:59PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > This is something I've noticed while working on the rotate recognizer
> > patch I've just posted. We emit say
> > roll %eax
> > instead of
> > roll $1, %eax
> > because the former is shorter, but emit
> > roll $31, %eax
> > instead of the equivalent, but shorter
> > rorl %eax
>
> Wouldn't this be better done as one or more peephole2s?
Given that the output routine is in all cases already C code,
I think peephole2s would be only slower and more code.
Jakub
