Peephole optimization is an optimization techniqueperformed on a small set of compiler-generated instructions; the small set is known as the peephole or window. Peephole optimization involves changing the small set of instructions to an equivalent set that has better performance. For example, instead of pushing register A onto the stack and then immediately popping the value back into register A, a peephole optimization would remove both instructions. Instead of adding A to A, a peephole optimization might do an arithmetic shift left. Instead of multiplying a floating point register by 8, a peephole optimization might scale the floating point register's exponent by 3. Instead of multiplying an index by 4, adding the result to a base address to get a pointer value, and then dereferencing the pointer, a peephole optimization may use a hardware addressing mode that accomplishes the same result with one instruction. The term peephole optimization was introduced by William Marshall McKeeman in 1965.
The following Java bytecode ... aload 1 aload 1 mul ... can be replaced by ... aload 1 dup mul ... This kind of optimization, like most peephole optimizations, makes certain assumptions about the efficiency of instructions. For instance, in this case, it is assumed that the dup operation is more efficient than the aload X operation.
Another example is to eliminate redundant load stores. a = b + c; d = a + e; is straightforwardly implemented as MOV b, R0 ; Copy b to the register ADD c, R0 ; Add c to the register, the register is now b+c MOV R0, a ; Copy the register to a MOV a, R0 ; Copy a to the register ADD e, R0 ; Add e to the register, the register is now a+e MOV R0, d ; Copy the register to d
but can be optimised to MOV b, R0 ; Copy b to the register ADD c, R0 ; Add c to the register, which is now b+c MOV R0, a ; Copy the register to a ADD e, R0 ; Add e to the register, which is now b+c+e MOV R0, d ; Copy the register to d
Removing redundant stack instructions
If the compiler saves registers on the stack before calling a subroutine and restores them when returning, consecutivecalls to subroutines may have redundant stack instructions. Suppose the compiler generates the following Z80 instructions for each procedure call: PUSH AF PUSH BC PUSH DE PUSH HL CALL _ADDR POP HL POP DE POP BC POP AF
If there were two consecutive subroutine calls, they would look like this: PUSH AF PUSH BC PUSH DE PUSH HL CALL _ADDR1 POP HL POP DE POP BC POP AF PUSH AF PUSH BC PUSH DE PUSH HL CALL _ADDR2 POP HL POP DE POP BC POP AF
The sequence POP regs followed by PUSH for the same registers is generally redundant. In cases where it is redundant, a peephole optimization would remove these instructions. In the example, this would cause another redundant POP/PUSH pair to appear in the peephole, and these would be removed in turn. Assuming that subroutine _ADDR2 does not depend on previous register values, removing all of the redundant code in the example above would eventually leave the following code: PUSH AF PUSH BC PUSH DE PUSH HL CALL _ADDR1 CALL _ADDR2 POP HL POP DE POP BC POP AF