From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2005-02-20 22:26:10
|
Patches item #1121755, was opened at 2005-02-13 12:39 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by frief You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=300599&aid=1121755&group_id=599 Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 3 Submitted By: Hubert Sack (hsack) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Some more peepholes for MCS51 port Initial Comment: I have added peepholes 3.h/i/j/k for optimized move of zero constant already being in the accumulator Peepholes 132.a/b/c are saving bytes and cycles at genCmpLt and genCmpGt Peepholes 256.g/h are removing CLR C after JC jumps (the CY is already cleared) The diff'd file and the hole PEEPH.DEF files is attached ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Frieder Ferlemann (frief) Date: 2005-02-20 22:26 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=589052 Committed peepholes 3.h-k and 132.a-f. (SDCC 2.4.8 963) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Frieder Ferlemann (frief) Date: 2005-02-16 19:01 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=589052 Hello Hubert, thanks for your peepholes, some comments about them: - Peepholes 3.x look fine but the indentation differs (spaces instead of a tabulator (tab setting is 8)). - We more or less stopped adding names/email addresses into the source except for large additions since the project is under cvs. Your name will of course appear in the Changelog (where it is visible) - Peephole matching is quite CPU intensive (a large fraction of SDCC's compile time is spent there). So when possible the optimizations should be done by the gen.c (genCmpGt, ... as you have noted within your changes). Especially this would apply to 132.x (as these don't cover idata, pdata, xdata space. Within gen.c you could catch these:) - When writing 256.a..f I couldn't find examples where rules 256.g/h would apply, that's why I skipped them. Also a label might be missing. For maintance reasons it would be nice to give a references where a rule applies. Hope you have a high frustration tolerance?) Frieder ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Hubert Sack (hsack) Date: 2005-02-14 15:40 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1160854 The peepholes 132.a/b/c must be extended to be secure in all cases. I have put the new one to the attachment (the diff and the hole file) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=300599&aid=1121755&group_id=599 |