Didn’t send out a newsletter last week since I was busy with the Protocol Symposium and then came down with a bad cold right after that left me unable to do anything except vibe-coding. That led to some very interesting results though, which I’ll write about in the future.1

I want to do an update on my world machines theory, based on recent readings in the book club. For those who came in late, the theme for the year has been what I call the Divergence Machine, my name for the world system that emerged between 1600-2000.

I didn’t get too far with The Education of Henry Adams, the September pick, since I was busy trying to finish Darwin’s Dangerous Idea from August and the side quest Revolutionary Spring from July (side-quest month) which is the one that has me really hooked, and is long and dense. So several reads in flight that will take a while to finish, but hey, that doesn’t mean we can’t start new reads, right?

I have 2 selections for October, and you can pick one. Unfortunately, Bayly is not available on Kindle and Appleby is expensive, so I recommend looking in your library and buying used copies if you can’t find them there.

Joyce Appleby’s Relentless Revolution
C. A. Bayly’s The Birth of the Modern World.

All book links and Discord discussion thread links (hosted on the Protocol Institute Discord) are on the book club page.

Now for the updates to world machines theory.

The 19th Century

The big learning for me from the last few months of book-clubbing is that the 19th century is where almost all the action is, for the Divergence Machine, and much of it was precipitated by the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, both of which are big events we’ve been reading around rather than through.

In the first few months of the year, we read several books that basically looked at how the foundations of the Divergence Machine got laid in the 17th and 18th centuries. This was a tumultuous and very eventful period in history, but I didn’t realize the extent to which the French Revolution was the precipitating event for divergence in our sense — unbridled plurality, epistemic and ontological divergence, and liberalism in the modern sense — really exploding all over the globe. Like any self-respecting exponential/network-effect type process, the back half of the growth curve was where the heavy lifting happened.

Speaking of eventfulness, a paper by William Sewell, Three Temporalities: Towards a sociology of the event, has been very influential for our book club and associated psychohistory discussions. Ht since I found it in a book (Logics of History) he loaned me several years ago, specifically tagging this chapter. It provides a useful way to think about “singularity” type events embedded into the larger currents of history, such as the French Revolution or 1848. We’re doing a bunch of theorizing inspired by it.

Before/After 1789-1814

1789-1814 was something like an explosion, through which divergence took off with a vengeance. You could say divergence got prototyped and theorized as a mechanism in 1600-1800 but was deployed to production during 1789-1814.

The books we read earlier in the summer, all pre-1800, about Alexander von Humboldt, the Jena romantics, the history of the mechanical clock, Enlightenment publishing around Diderot’s Encyclopedie, and the philosophical ferment around Leibniz, Spinoza, Hume and Adam Smith, all converge on the French revolution and Napoleonic wars in one way or another.

I finally got why Hegel tagged the Battle of Jena-Aurstedt (1806) as the og candidate for the End of History. It is a breakpoint when a certain kind of historical process concluded and a distinctly different kind took off. I think Fukuyama was right to relocate the End of History to the end of the Cold War, but I can see why and how 1806 would have seemed compelling to Hegel. It was a similar kind of break boundary. I think the reason Hegel got it wrong is that history only ended for elites in 1806. The masses had yet to be even brought into history as meaningful actors (not counting pre-modern peasant revolutions, which in a certain sense were sub-historical background phenomena). The reason 1989-1992 is a much more compelling candidate is that that marked the end of history for everybody.

This makes me think history may be restarting (a conclusion I’ve long resisted more stubbornly than Fukuyama himself): AIs are a new class of political actors that have yet to enter history. Whatever your views on the sentience or consciousness or personhood of these actors, they are emerging as true actors in the same sense nations and corporations already have. And while nations and corporations are accounted for in Fukuyama’s end-of-history tag, AIs have emerged since then.

So yeah, history may be restarting.

1848 as the Inflection Point

After the end of Napoleon’s career, things really start to get going for divergence. Like many, I used to treat 1648 (Peace of Westphalia) as the notional starting point for political/nation-state modernity, but now I think 1848 is the right date. The two intervening centuries didn’t really establish the idea of the nation state. They didn’t even properly separate church and state, or systematically contain monarchial power. You want a real hinge year, look at 1848.

Christopher Clark’s Revolutionary Spring is the one book I’d highly recommend if you read just one book from our book club so far. It focuses on the build-up to, and aftermath of, the wave of revolutions across 1848 in Europe that created the modern nation-state, along with all the familiar political factions that persist to this day — progressive radicals, liberals, and conservatives. And the dominant actors who emerged in 1848 were the non-elites that didn’t really matter in 1806 when Hegel thought history ended.

The prehistory of Marxism in particular, is a particularly interesting thread, featuring such French thinkers/cult leaders as Saint-Simon and Michael Fourier (no relation to the mathematician) and decades-long political ferment around what was then called the “social question” — the new conditions of urban poverty and squalor being created by the early industrial age. Marx was just one among a great many reformist ideologues in the mix in the decades leading up to 1848. He came out ahead as the leading ideologue by way of synthesizing all the strands in a coherent, opinionated, and legible way, more than by originating them.

Many historical references now make more sense. The famous barricade scene in Les Miserables dates to this era and is situated in this history. The word putsch apparently derives from the zuriputsch, a Zurich instance of that type of political-revolutionary episode.

Anglosphere Exceptionalism

Equally important is history that didn’t happen. Britain largely escaped the Continental turmoil of the mid-19th century because it had already gone through a more primitive form of the transition in the 17th-18th centuries and had developed a kind of immune resistance to the influences originating in France.

A crucially important note here (which emerges in the Hume-Smith book) is that for Britain and the Anglosphere generally, the Scottish Enlightenment was far more consequential than the Continental one, and had a much stronger economic-technological character (think Adam Smith and James Watt). So instead of a revolutionary spring, it got the industrial revolution. The story of the West since then has been the continent trying to absorb the Anglosphere’s industrial-economic ethos and the Anglosphere trying to absorb the continent’s political-social ethos. Both have gone poorly, for the West itself, and the world. A battle of two immune systems fighting alien DNA.

One little subplot probably worth exploring here. The Royal Society and Academie Francaise emerged before the 1800s, along with (rather curiously) the Russian Academy (thanks in part to Leibniz) as major institutions (there were others, but less influential), with Latin, and later French, as the dominant languages. These were pre-nationalist scientific societies that were born of royal patronage. But in the mid 1800s, we see a burst of nationalist ones, in unexpected places like Hungary and Serbia, that aimed to not only reproduce the French or British model, but modernize their languages in order to make the suitable for doing science. This tendency of course, spread to the rest of the world. But on the whole, arguably, the British model won modernity, establishing English as the language of science and development. Revealingly, French remained the language of international politics and diplomacy much longer than it remained the language of science.

I have to look into Anglosphere-Continent dynamics more carefully. I think they were similar to the US-Soviet or US-China epochs that came later. Primal tensions that proved/disproved important things about history.

The 1830s-40s feature recognizably modern culture-war type discourses all over the place, though perhaps with more of a religious flavor.

Colonial Regions Reconsidered

One of the biggest surprises for me was the extent to which the national movements around the 1848 revolutions resemble the freedom struggles in the colonial parts of the world a few decades later. In fact, it seems pretty clear there’s not just inspiration, but direct causation and continuity, since there is barely any gap between the two. Many of the leaders of various colonial freedom movements were already alive and watching in 1848, and early events were already unfolding (the first war of Indian independence or “sepoy mutiny” was in 1857, less than a decade after the events of 1848; Perry forced Japan open in 1853; the Taiping rebellion started in 1850).

The colonial freedom and nationalism movements, arguably, were merely continuations of the 1848 European dynamics in non-European territories, with non-European idiomatic characteristics. I’d argue even the American Civil War was part of this global wave of emergence of modern nations, not a uniquely American event.

Oddly, this makes me more sympathetic to the colonial powers. The 1600-1800 period of colonialism was pure, brutal mercantilist expansion on the back of a small technological edge that had not yet compounded significantly. But 1800-1950 or so, world history was in fact already loosely synchronized. Japan for instance, emerged almost in lockstep with modern Europe, from a roughly similar condition. It did not mimic European development patterns after they’d stabilized. Other non-European societies followed. Some events in India (such as the Anglo-Sikh war) belong in this era, rather than in the previous era of colonial wars proper (such as the Mysore and Maratha wars of the 18th century).

It isn’t surprising that much of the transmission/continuation of European reform outside Europe was the work of Western educated lawyers (like Nehru and Gandhi in India). They imported not just ideas about constitutional machinery, but the softer ideas like the ideas of nationalism, socialism, conservatism, and most importantly, liberalism. The Indian independence movement, which is the one I know the most about, rhymes eerily with the European ones.

Econo-Globalism Triumphant?

One way to frame the history after 1848 is as a struggle for dominance between the political culture of the Continent and the econo-globalist culture of the Anglosphere, and arguably, the latter “won” to a large extent. It’s not that the events of 1848 weren’t consequential. They were hugely consequential around the world. But they got largely contained and tamed by the more powerful forces unleashed in the Anglosphere, and continental Europeans have been pissed off about it ever since. Possibly both World Wars can be seen as expressions of this tension.

That brings us to the final missing piece in this story.

The final missing piece in this big story, the econo-globalism piece. I think we will find the answers we’re looking for in our October reads. Appleby’s book in particular has long been on my radar, and seems very promising (ht ). The Bayly book, which I discovered via a ChatGPT brainstorm will, I suspect, substantiate the thesis I just outlined above — the ripple effects from the 19th century that transformed the world, creating the beginnings of globalization.

At the symposium, I gave a talk on Blygger, a kind of RSS 3.0ish AI-native future-of-blogging/social publishing protocol I’ve been developing in stealth for a few months with Claude. Just a week ago, all I had was a rudimentary spec and janky demo reference client. But the talk appeared to hit a chord and it looks like a lot of people were itching for something like this. A bunch of people immediately hopped on, made their own blygs despite the early and unstable nature of the spec and code, and started contributing significant amounts of code. There’s now a very active core group developing the protocol and multiple clients, and a dozen blygs already up and running. It’s not yet ready for prime-time or non-technical users, but if you think you can keep up with rapid and unstable pre-release development, and are comfortable working with coding agents, you’re welcome to jump in. There’s already a thriving little blygging scene going. Here’s my personal blyg.

Evaluation set	v19	e1a	Δ
Held-out short tasks	0.647	0.695	+0.048
MuSiQue	0.882	0.948	+0.066
ContractNLI	0.873	0.864	−0.009
BoardgameQA	0.820	0.884	+0.064
HotpotQA (held out)	0.719	0.748	+0.029
Generated, v16’s	0.857	0.851	−0.006
Generated, v18’s	0.777	0.786	+0.009
Adequacy, HelpSteer2	0.722	0.761	+0.039
Adequacy, generated, balanced	0.788	0.821	+0.033

netip.Addr features an Unmap() method returning the unwrapped IPv4 contained in an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address: from ::ffff:203.0.113.10 or ::ffff:cb00:710a, it returns 203.0.113.10.¹ There is no Map() or To6() method for the reverse direction. Such a method is trivial to implement, but Go maintainers have rejected it on the grounds that users should write netip.AddrFrom16(ip.As16()) and let the compiler optimize it.² Today, this pattern is eight times slower than a native method. How can we teach the compiler to optimize this sequence?

The alternatives
Hacking the Go compiler
- The hammer
- The screwdriver
Next steps

The alternatives

Let’s explore three ways to implement the map semantics for netip.Addr. My favorite is to add it to the Go standard library. Go maintainers prefer a small external helper chaining netip.AddrFrom16() and netip.Addr.As16(), hoping the compiler eventually optimizes it. The unsafe package opens a third path, with the same performance as the first solution.

Modifying the Go standard library

Internally, netip.Addr stores any IP address as a 128-bit value with an extra field z to encode the family and the zone:

type Addr struct {
    addr uint128
    z unique.Handle[addrDetail]
}

type addrDetail struct {
    isV6   bool   // IPv4 is false, IPv6 is true.
    zoneV6 string // != "" only if IsV6 is true.
}

var (
    z0    unique.Handle[addrDetail]
    z4    = unique.Make(addrDetail{})
    z6noz = unique.Make(addrDetail{isV6: true})
)

AddrFrom4() encodes an IPv4 address as an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address and sets z to the unique value z4:

// AddrFrom4 returns the address of the IPv4 address given by the bytes in addr.
func AddrFrom4(addr [4]byte) Addr {
    return Addr{
        addr: uint128{
            0,
            0xffff00000000 |
                uint64(addr[0])<<24 | uint64(addr[1])<<16 |
                uint64(addr[2])<<8 | uint64(addr[3])},
        z: z4,
    }
}

Unmap() turns an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address into an IPv4 address by setting the z field to z4:

func (ip Addr) Unmap() Addr {
    if ip.Is4In6() {
        ip.z = z4
    }
    return ip
}

Implementing the reverse direction inside the Go standard library is trivial: we set the z field to z6noz if the address is IPv4.

// To6 maps an IPv4 address to an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address. It returns an
// IPv6 address unmodified.
func (ip Addr) To6() Addr {
    if ip.Is4() {
        ip.z = z6noz
    }
    return ip
}

As a helper

We can’t access the z field from outside the net/netip package. Instead, we build a small helper around the netip.AddrFrom16(ip.As16()) pattern:

// AddrTo6 maps an IPv4 address to an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address. It returns an
// IPv6 address unmodified.
func AddrTo6(ip netip.Addr) netip.Addr {
    if ip.Is4() {
        ip = netip.AddrFrom16(ip.As16())
    }
    return ip
}

As an unsafe function

Another solution uses the unsafe package to alter the Addr struct through a proxy with the same memory layout:³

// addrProxy has the same memory layout as netip.Addr.
type addrProxy struct {
    addr [2]uint64      // netip.uint128
    z    unsafe.Pointer // unique.Handle[netip.addrDetail]
}

var (
    anyIPv6    = netip.IPv6Unspecified()
    netipZ6noz = (*addrProxy)(unsafe.Pointer(&anyIPv6)).z
)

// AddrTo6 maps an IPv4 address to an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address. It returns an
// IPv6 address unmodified.
func AddrTo6(ip netip.Addr) netip.Addr {
    if !ip.Is4() {
        return ip
    }
    (*addrProxy)(unsafe.Pointer(&ip)).z = netipZ6noz
    return ip
}

Benchmarks

On my computer, with Go 1.27.1, the standard library solution costs 0.88 ns per operation, while the solution favored by Go maintainers costs 7.14 ns. The unsafe solution matches the performance of the first one.

goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/vincentbernat/go-netip-addrto6
cpu: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core Processor
                   │     sec/op     │
AddrTo6/safe            7.137n ± 0%
AddrTo6/unsafe         0.8682n ± 2%
AddrTo6/builtin        0.8775n ± 2%

Assembly code

Let’s check the assembly code the compiler generates for each solution.⁴ The one built into the standard library looks like this:⁵

// AX = input.addr.hi, BX = input.addr.lo, CX = input.z
 CMPQ  net/netip·z4(SB), CX     ; check "z" if this is an IPv4 address
 JNE   end                      ; if not, stop here
 MOVQ  net/netip·z6noz(SB), CX  ; CX = netip.z6noz
end:
 RET
// return value = Addr{hi: AX, lo: BX, z: CX}

Go’s assembly language is not a direct representation of the underlying machine language: it operates on a semi-abstract instruction set derived from Plan 9’s assembler. It has four pseudo-registers: FP (frame pointer for function arguments), PC (program counter), SB (static base pointer for global symbols), and SP (stack pointer). It also has architecture-specific registers like AX, CX, DX, BX, SI, DI, and R8 to R15. Instructions storing data use their last argument as the destination. Instructions can carry an explicit size suffix: MOVB moves a byte, MOVW 16 bits, MOVL 32 bits, and MOVQ 64 bits. In the example above, the first instruction compares the 64-bit value z4 with the CX register.

The unsafe solution looks almost the same:

// AX = input.addr.hi, BX = input.addr.lo, CX = input.z
 CMPQ  net/netip·z4(SB), CX  ; check "z" if this is an IPv4 address
 JNE   end                   ; if not, stop here
 MOVQ  netipZ6noz(SB), CX    ; CX = netip.z6noz
end:
 RET
// return value = Addr{hi: AX, lo: BX, z: CX}

The helper solution has far more instructions. To understand why, let’s look at the code for As16() and AddrFrom16(). They are short enough for the compiler to inline them.

func (ip Addr) As16() (a16 [16]byte) {
    byteorder.BEPutUint64(a16[:8], ip.addr.hi)
    byteorder.BEPutUint64(a16[8:], ip.addr.lo)
    return a16
}

func AddrFrom16(addr [16]byte) Addr {
    return Addr{
        addr: uint128{
            byteorder.BEUint64(addr[:8]),
            byteorder.BEUint64(addr[8:]),
        },
        z: z6noz,
    }
}

We can already guess the pattern to optimize: the code packs the IP address into an array, copies it, then unpacks it. If we inline the Go code by hand, we get:

func AddrTo6(input netip.Addr) netip.Addr {
    if !input.Is4() {
        return input
    }

    var a16 [16]byte
    byteorder.BEPutUint64(a16[:8], input.addr.hi)
    byteorder.BEPutUint64(a16[8:], input.addr.lo)

    addr := a16

    var output netip.Addr
    output.addr.hi = byteorder.BEUint64(addr[:8])
    output.addr.lo = byteorder.BEUint64(addr[8:])
    output.z = netip.z6noz
    return output
}

As humans, we can mentally derive the optimized form:

func AddrTo6(input netip.Addr) netip.Addr {
    if !input.Is4() {
        return input
    }
    var output netip.Addr
    output.addr.hi = input.addr.hi
    output.addr.lo = input.addr.lo
    output.z = netip.z6noz
    return output
}

Unfortunately, as of Go 1.26.8, the compiler is not smart enough to do the same:

// AX = input.addr.hi, BX = input.addr.lo, CX = input.z
; Push the stack (32 bytes):
;    0(SP) addr netip.uint128
;   16(SP) a16 [16]byte
 PUSHQ   BP
 MOVQ    SP, BP
 SUBQ    $32, SP

 CMPQ    net/netip·z4(SB), CX  ; check "z" if this is an IPv4 address
 JNE     end                   ; if not, stop here

; Pack: byteorder.BEPutUint64(a16[:8], input.addr.hi)
;       byteorder.BEPutUint64(a16[8:], input.addr.lo)
 MOVBEQ  AX, net/netip·a16+16(SP)
 MOVBEQ  BX, net/netip·a16+24(SP)

; addr = a16, 16 bytes at once through the vector register X0
 MOVUPS  net/netip·a16+16(SP), X0
 MOVUPS  X0, net/netip·addr(SP)

; CX = netip.z6noz
 MOVQ    net/netip·z6noz(SB), CX
; Unpack: output.addr.hi = byteorder.BEUint64(addr[:8])
;         output.addr.lo = byteorder.BEUint64(addr[8:])
 MOVBEQ  net/netip·addr(SP), AX
 MOVBEQ  net/netip·addr+8(SP), BX

end:
 ADDQ    $32, SP
 POPQ    BP
 RET
// return value = Addr{hi: AX, lo: BX, z: CX}

The compiler does a decent job on the byte shuffling: the eight byte stores of BEPutUint64() become a single MOVBEQ, which stores a register byte-swapped. The eight byte loads of BEUint64() become a single MOVBEQ the other way round.⁶ Three groups of instructions remain: a pack, a copy, and an unpack.

Hacking the Go compiler

The Go compiler has several phases:

Parsing: The compiler tokenizes and parses the source code. It builds a syntax tree for each source file.
Type checking: The compiler maps each identifier to the object it denotes, folds constants, and infers the type of every expression.
IR construction: The compiler converts the syntax tree and its types into its own intermediate representation (IR). This process, called “noding,” goes through a serialization format named unified IR.
Middle end: The compiler performs several optimization passes on the IR, such as devirtualization, function call inlining, and escape analysis.
Walk: This phase runs two steps: order of evaluation decomposes complex statements into simpler ones, and desugaring transforms higher-level Go constructs, like switch or channels, into more primitive instructions or calls to the runtime.
Generic SSA: The compiler converts the IR into Static Single Assignment (SSA) form, a lower-level intermediate representation suited for machine-independent optimizations and rewrite rules.
Machine code generation: The compiler rewrites the SSA form into machine-specific variants, allocates registers, and applies more optimization passes. At the end, the assembler turns the generated instructions into machine code.

The hammer

My first idea is to replace occurrences of netip.AddrFrom16(ip.As16()) with netip.Addr{addr: ip.addr, z: netip.z6noz} as early as possible, during the “noding” process. Before that, the type checking phase prevents us from accessing unexported struct fields.

Go 1.27 introduced a convenient debug option to dump the IR of a function at interesting points during compilation:

$ GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.27.1 GOAMD64=v3 go build -a -gcflags="-d=astdump=AddrTo6Safe" .
Writing text ast output for AddrTo6Safe to AddrTo6Safe.ast
Writing html ast output for AddrTo6Safe to AddrTo6Safe.html
Writing html syntax output for AddrTo6Safe to AddrTo6Safe.syntax.html

In the HTML file, the first column shows the IR as it comes out of noding:

DCLFUNC addrto6.AddrTo6Safe ABI:ABIInternal FUNC-func(netip.Addr) netip.Addr
DCLFUNC-Dcl
. NAME-addrto6.ip Class:PPARAM Offset:0 OnStack Used netip.Addr
. NAME-addrto6.~r0 Class:PPARAMOUT Offset:0 OnStack netip.Addr
DCLFUNC-body
. IF # ipv6_safe.go:11:2
. IF-Cond
. . CALLFUNC bool
. . CALLFUNC-Fun
. . . METHEXPR addrto6.Is4 FUNC-func(netip.Addr) bool
. . . . TYPE netip.Addr Class:PEXTERN Offset:0 type netip.Addr
. . CALLFUNC-Args
. . . NAME-addrto6.ip Class:PPARAM Offset:0 OnStack Used netip.Addr
. IF-Body
. . AS # ipv6_safe.go:12:6
. . . NAME-addrto6.ip Class:PPARAM Offset:0 OnStack Used netip.Addr
. . . CALLFUNC netip.Addr
. . . CALLFUNC-Fun
. . . . NAME-netip.AddrFrom16 Class:PFUNC Offset:0 Used FUNC-func([16]byte) netip.Addr
. . . CALLFUNC-Args
. . . . CALLFUNC ARRAY-[16]byte
. . . . CALLFUNC-Fun
. . . . . METHEXPR addrto6.As16 FUNC-func(netip.Addr) [16]byte
. . . . . . TYPE netip.Addr Class:PEXTERN Offset:0 type netip.Addr
. . . . CALLFUNC-Args
. . . . . NAME-addrto6.ip Class:PPARAM Offset:0 OnStack Used netip.Addr
. RETURN # ipv6_safe.go:14:2
. RETURN-Results
. . NAME-addrto6.ip Class:PPARAM Offset:0 OnStack Used netip.Addr

In the body of the if statement, we spot the calls to the method netip.Addr.As16() and to the function netip.AddrFrom16(). Our goal is to patch them with a struct literal:

IF-Body
. AS # ipv6_safe.go:12:6
. . NAME-addrto6.ip Class:PPARAM Offset:0 OnStack Used netip.Addr
. . STRUCTLIT netip.Addr
. . STRUCTLIT-List
. . . STRUCTKEY netip.addr
. . . . DOT netip.addr netip.uint128
. . . . . NAME-addrto6.ip Class:PPARAM Offset:0 OnStack Used netip.Addr
. . . STRUCTKEY netip.z
. . . . NAME-netip.z6noz Class:PEXTERN Offset:0 unique.Handle[net/netip.addrDetail]

In noder’s reader.go, the expr() method builds the IR tree for an expression. At the end of the exprCall case, we add a call to a rewriteAddrFrom16As16() function. It takes the current node and returns the struct literal on success, or nil if the rewrite is not possible. First, we check that we have the expected pattern: a call to the netip.AddrFrom16() function with a call to the netip.Addr.As16() method as its only argument:

func rewriteAddrFrom16As16(n ir.Node) ir.Node {
    call, ok := n.(*ir.CallExpr)
    if !ok || call.Op() != ir.OCALLFUNC ||
        len(call.Args) != 1 || len(call.Init()) != 0 ||
        !isNetipFunc(call.Fun, "AddrFrom16") {
        return nil
    }
    inner, ok := call.Args[0].(*ir.CallExpr)
    if !ok || inner.Op() != ir.OCALLFUNC ||
        len(inner.Args) != 1 || len(inner.Init()) != 0 ||
        !isNetipFunc(inner.Fun, "Addr.As16") {
        return nil
    }
    x := inner.Args[0]
    // [...]
}

Then, we fetch netip.z6noz:

z6noz, err := lookupVar(ir.StaticCalleeName(call.Fun).Sym().Pkg, "z6noz")
if err != nil {
    return nil
}

And we build the struct literal:

typ := call.Type()
pos := call.Pos()
var list []ir.Node
for i, f := range typ.Fields() {
    var value ir.Node
    switch f.Sym.Name {
    case "addr":
        value = typecheck.DotField(pos, x, i)
    case "z":
        value = z6noz
    default:
        return nil
    }
    list = append(list, ir.NewStructKeyExpr(pos, f, value))
}
lit := ir.NewCompLitExpr(pos, ir.OSTRUCTLIT, typ, list)
lit.SetTypecheck(1)
return lit

Have a look at the complete patch.⁷ We can test it with the following commands:

$ cd src
$ ./make.bash
Building Go cmd/dist using /usr/lib/go-1.27. (go1.27.1 linux/amd64)
Building Go toolchain1 and bootstrap cmd/go (go_bootstrap) using /usr/lib/go-1.27.
Building Go toolchain2 using go_bootstrap and Go toolchain1.
Building Go toolchain3 and commands using go_bootstrap and Go toolchain2.
Checking command staleness for linux/amd64.
---
Installed Go for linux/amd64 in /home/bernat/code/free/go
Installed commands in /home/bernat/code/free/go/bin
*** You need to add /home/bernat/code/free/go/bin to your PATH.
$ export PATH=$PWD/../bin:$PATH
$ go version
go version go1.28-devel_9834516e20 Sat Sep 12 08:23:11 2026 -0700 linux/amd64
$ go test net/netip/...
ok      net/netip   0.224s
$ cd ../../go-netip-addrto6
$ go test .
ok      github.com/vincentbernat/go-netip-addrto6   0.062s

The generated code for the helper is now the shortest possible version!

// AX = input.addr.hi, BX = input.addr.lo, CX = input.z
 CMPQ    net/netip·z4(SB), CX     ; check "z" if this is an IPv4 address
 JNE     end                      ; if not, stop here
 MOVQ    net/netip·z6noz(SB), CX  ; CX = netip.z6noz
end:
 RET
// return value = Addr{hi: AX, lo: BX, z: CX}

Go maintainers are unlikely to accept this change. It relies on the internal structure of net/netip.Addr. It’s an ugly hack in the noder, whose job is to faithfully translate the type-checked AST into the IR. And it’s harder to maintain than adding a To6() method.

The screwdriver

The right place for such an optimization is the generic SSA phase. One of the last machine-independent passes is memcombine. With the appropriate debug flag, the compiler dumps the SSA form after this pass:⁸

$ GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.26.8 GOAMD64=v3 \
> go build -a -gcflags='-d=ssa/memcombine/dump=AddrTo6Safe' .
$ head -5 AddrTo6Safe_01__memcombine.dump
AddrTo6Safe func(netip.Addr) netip.Addr
  b2:
    (?) v1 = InitMem <mem>
    (?) v2 = SP <uintptr>
    (?) v3 = SB <uintptr>

The result of the memcombine pass follows the same structure as the assembly code for AddrTo6Safe() we looked at earlier: two stores, one move, and two loads we would like to optimize away.

; […]
  v502 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+0} [0]              ; input.addr.hi
  v490 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+8} [1]              ; input.addr.lo
  v466 = ArgIntReg <*netip.addrDetail> {ip+16} [2]  ; input.z
; […]
  v22 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.a16} v2 v1     ; &a16
  v173 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v442 = Bswap64 <uint64> v490                      ; bswap(input.addr.lo)
  v542 = Bswap64 <uint64> v502                      ; bswap(input.addr.hi)
  v161 = Store <mem> {uint64} v22 v542 v23          ; a16[:8] = bswap(hi)
  v282 = Store <mem> {uint64} v173 v442 v161        ; a16[8:] = bswap(lo)

  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16

  v415 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v285                    ; &addr[8]
  v416 = Load <uint64> v285 v286                    ; addr[:8]
  v299 = Bswap64 <uint64> v416                      ; output.addr.hi
  v174 = Load <uint64> v415 v286                    ; addr[8:]
  v39  = Bswap64 <uint64> v174                      ; output.addr.lo
; […]

Each line features a value identifier (v442), an operation with its type (Bswap64 <uint64>), and its arguments (v490).⁹ Values are the basic building blocks of SSA and are defined exactly once. Square brackets enclose integer parameters ([8]) and curly braces contain auxiliary arguments ({netip.addr}). Operations writing to memory produce a new memory state. Every memory operation takes the current state as its last argument, which keeps them in order.

On paper

Let’s focus on output.addr.lo, aka v39:

  v490 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+8} [1]              ; input.addr.lo
  v22 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.a16} v2 v1     ; &a16
  v173 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v442 = Bswap64 <uint64> v490                      ; bswap(input.addr.lo)
  v282 = Store <mem> {uint64} v173 v442 v161        ; a16[8:] = bswap(lo)
  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16
  v415 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v285                    ; &addr[8]
  v174 = Load <uint64> v415 v286                    ; addr[8:]
  v39  = Bswap64 <uint64> v174                      ; output.addr.lo

To simplify this code, we could apply three rewriting rules:

The first one adds a shortcut when loading through a move: (Load (OffPtr [o] p) (Move p src mem)) => (Load (OffPtr [o] src) mem). This matches v174 with its arguments v415 and v286 and creates a new value v600:

  v490 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+8} [1]              ; input.addr.lo
  v22 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.a16} v2 v1     ; &a16
  v173 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v442 = Bswap64 <uint64> v490                      ; bswap(input.addr.lo)
  v282 = Store <mem> {uint64} v173 v442 v161        ; a16[8:] = bswap(lo)
  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16
  v415 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v285                    ; &addr[8]
  v600 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v174 = Load <uint64> v600 v282                    ; a16[8:]
  v39  = Bswap64 <uint64> v174                      ; output.addr.lo

The second one simplifies a load following a store: (Load p (Store p x _)) => x. The load is forwarded: the stored value replaces it and no memory access remains. It matches v174. It notices that v600 and v173 are the same address and replaces v174 with a copy of v442:

  v490 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+8} [1]              ; input.addr.lo
  v22 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.a16} v2 v1     ; &a16
  v173 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v442 = Bswap64 <uint64> v490                      ; bswap(input.addr.lo)
  v282 = Store <mem> {uint64} v173 v442 v161        ; a16[8:] = bswap(lo)
  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16
  v415 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v285                    ; &addr[8]
  v600 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v174 = Copy <uint64> v442                         ; bswap(input.addr.lo)
  v39  = Bswap64 <uint64> v174                      ; output.addr.lo

The last step cancels the two byte swaps: (Bswap64 (Bswap64 x)) => x. v39 becomes a copy of v490:

  v490 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+8} [1]              ; input.addr.lo
  v22 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.a16} v2 v1     ; &a16
  v173 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v442 = Bswap64 <uint64> v490                      ; bswap(input.addr.lo)
  v282 = Store <mem> {uint64} v173 v442 v161        ; a16[8:] = bswap(lo)
  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16
  v415 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v285                    ; &addr[8]
  v600 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v174 = Copy <uint64> v442                         ; bswap(input.addr.lo)
  v39  = Copy <uint64> v490                         ; output.addr.lo = input.addr.lo

If we ignore the values not needed to compute v39, only this SSA form remains:

  v490 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+8} [1]  ; input.addr.lo
  v39  = Copy <uint64> v490             ; output.addr.lo = input.addr.lo

Let’s switch to output.addr.hi, aka v299:

  v502 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+0} [0]              ; input.addr.hi
  v22 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.a16} v2 v1     ; &a16
  v173 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v542 = Bswap64 <uint64> v502                      ; bswap(input.addr.hi)
  v161 = Store <mem> {uint64} v22 v542 v23          ; a16[:8] = bswap(hi)
  v282 = Store <mem> {uint64} v173 v442 v161        ; a16[8:] = bswap(lo)
  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16
  v416 = Load <uint64> v285 v286                    ; addr[:8]
  v299 = Bswap64 <uint64> v416                      ; output.addr.hi

To optimize it away, we also apply three rewriting rules:

The first one also adds a shortcut when loading through a move, but without an offset: (Load p (Move p src mem)) => (Load src mem). This rewrites v416 to use arguments from v286:

  v502 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+0} [0]              ; input.addr.hi
  v22 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.a16} v2 v1     ; &a16
  v173 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v542 = Bswap64 <uint64> v502                      ; bswap(input.addr.hi)
  v161 = Store <mem> {uint64} v22 v542 v23          ; a16[:8] = bswap(hi)
  v282 = Store <mem> {uint64} v173 v442 v161        ; a16[8:] = bswap(lo)
  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16
  v416 = Load <uint64> v22 v282                     ; a16[:8]
  v299 = Bswap64 <uint64> v416                      ; output.addr.hi

The second rule forwards a value stored one step earlier, skipping over a store to another address: (Load p (Store q _ (Store p x _))) => x. This matches v416: x is v542, p is v22 (&a16), q is v173 (&a16[8]), and p and q do not overlap for uint64.

  v502 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+0} [0]              ; input.addr.hi
  v22 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.a16} v2 v1     ; &a16
  v173 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v542 = Bswap64 <uint64> v502                      ; bswap(input.addr.hi)
  v161 = Store <mem> {uint64} v22 v542 v23          ; a16[:8] = bswap(hi)
  v282 = Store <mem> {uint64} v173 v442 v161        ; a16[8:] = bswap(lo)
  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16
  v416 = Copy <uint64> v542                         ; bswap(input.addr.hi)
  v299 = Bswap64 <uint64> v416                      ; output.addr.hi

The third rule cancels two byte swaps: (Bswap64 (Bswap64 x)) => x. v299 becomes a copy of v502:

  v502 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+0} [0]              ; input.addr.hi
  v22 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.a16} v2 v1     ; &a16
  v173 = OffPtr <*byte> [8] v22                     ; &a16[8]
  v542 = Bswap64 <uint64> v502                      ; bswap(input.addr.hi)
  v161 = Store <mem> {uint64} v22 v542 v23          ; a16[:8] = bswap(hi)
  v282 = Store <mem> {uint64} v173 v442 v161        ; a16[8:] = bswap(lo)
  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16
  v416 = Copy <uint64> v542                         ; bswap(input.addr.hi)
  v299 = Copy <uint64> v502                         ; output.addr.hi = input.addr.hi

If we remove the values not used to compute v299, we get this SSA form:

  v502 = ArgIntReg <uint64> {ip+0} [0] ; input.addr.hi
  v299 = Copy <uint64> v502            ; output.addr.hi = input.addr.hi

In practice

Most of these rules already exist in generic.rules. They use conditions to validate their context: ssa.IsSamePtr() for the same address, ssa.Disjoint() for addresses that do not overlap. The rule forwarding a stored value to a load already exists with three variants looking through several other stores. Here are the two we need:

(Load <t1> p1 (Store {t2} p2 x _))
    && ssa.IsSamePtr(p1, p2)
    && copyCompatibleType(t1, x.Type)
    && t1.Size() == t2.Size()
    => x
(Load <t1> p1 (Store {t2} p2 _ (Store {t3} p3 x _)))
    && ssa.IsSamePtr(p1, p3)
    && copyCompatibleType(t1, x.Type)
    && t1.Size() == t3.Size()
    && ssa.Disjoint(p3, t3, p2, t2)
    => x

Go 1.27 added the rule loading through a move with CL 748200 to fix issue #77720:

(Load <t1> op1:(OffPtr [o1] p1) move:(Move [n] p2 src mem))
    && o1 >= 0 && o1+t1.Size() <= n && ssa.IsSamePtr(p1, p2)
    && !ssa.IsVolatile(src)
    => @move.Block (Load <t1> (OffPtr <op1.Type> [o1] src) mem)

It lacks a variant without an offset:

(Load <t1> p1 move:(Move [n] p2 src mem))
    && p1.Op != ssaop.OpOffPtr
    && t1.Size() <= n && ssa.IsSamePtr(p1, p2)
    && !ssa.IsVolatile(src)
    => @move.Block (Load <t1> (OffPtr <p1.Type> [0] src) mem)

There is no generic rule to cancel two byte swaps, but the AMD64 lowering pass includes this rule:

(BSWAP(Q|L) (BSWAP(Q|L) p)) => p

After switching to Go’s development branch and adding the missing rule, the generated assembly code is worse than with Go 1.26.8, even though our additional rule slightly improves the situation at the end:

// AX = input.addr.hi, BX = input.addr.lo, CX = input.z
; Push the stack (16 bytes):
;    0(SP) a16 [16]byte
 PUSHQ   BP
 MOVQ    SP, BP
 SUBQ    $16, SP

 CMPQ    net/netip·z4(SB), CX       ; check "z" if this is an IPv4 address
 JNE     end                        ; if not, stop here

; The four forwarded bytes: the low half of input.addr.lo is taken apart and
; put back together in registers
 MOVQ    BX, DX                     ; DX = input.addr.lo
 SHRQ    $24, BX                    ; BX = input.addr.lo >> 24
 MOVQ    DX, SI                     ; SI = input.addr.lo
 SHRQ    $16, DX                    ; DX = input.addr.lo >> 16
 MOVQ    SI, DI                     ; DI = input.addr.lo, kept for the pack
 SHRQ    $8, SI                     ; SI = input.addr.lo >> 8
 MOVBLZX DIB, R8                    ; R8 = byte(input.addr.lo)
 MOVBLZX SIB, SI                    ; SI = byte(input.addr.lo >> 8)
 SHLQ    $8, SI
 ORQ     R8, SI                     ; SI = two low bytes of input.addr.lo
 MOVBLZX DL, DX                     ; DX = byte(input.addr.lo >> 16)
 SHLQ    $16, DX
 ORQ     SI, DX
 MOVBLZX BL, BX                     ; BX = byte(input.addr.lo >> 24)
 SHLQ    $24, BX
 ORQ     DX, BX                     ; BX = input.addr.lo & 0xffffffff

; Pack: byteorder.BEPutUint64(a16[:8], input.addr.hi)
;       byteorder.BEPutUint64(a16[8:], input.addr.lo)
 MOVBEQ  AX, net/netip·a16(SP)
 MOVBEQ  DI, net/netip·a16+8(SP)

; The four other bytes of input.addr.lo, read one by one from a16
 MOVBLZX net/netip·a16+11(SP), DX   ; a16[11]
 SHLQ    $32, DX
 ORQ     DX, BX
 MOVBLZX net/netip·a16+10(SP), DX   ; a16[10]
 SHLQ    $40, DX
 ORQ     DX, BX
 MOVBLZX net/netip·a16+9(SP), DX    ; a16[9]
 SHLQ    $48, DX
 ORQ     DX, BX
 MOVBLZX net/netip·a16+8(SP), DX    ; a16[8]
 SHLQ    $56, DX

; output.z = netip.z6noz
 MOVQ    net/netip·z6noz(SB), CX
; output.addr.hi = byteorder.BEUint64(a16[:8])
 MOVBEQ  net/netip·a16(SP), AX
; output.addr.lo assembled from the previous steps
 ORQ     DX, BX

end:
 LEAVEQ
 RET
// return value = Addr{hi: AX, lo: BX, z: CX}

The rule loading through a move, added in Go 1.27, introduced this regression.

Out of order

Let’s not give up now! In reality, the rewriting rules run before memcombine, notably in the late opt pass. At this point, the inlined versions of BEPutUint64() and BEUint64() still expand to sixteen byte stores and sixteen byte loads, matching their source code:

func BEUint64(b []byte) uint64 {
    _ = b[7] // bounds check hint to compiler; see golang.org/issue/14808
    return uint64(b[7]) | uint64(b[6])<<8 | uint64(b[5])<<16 | uint64(b[4])<<24 |
        uint64(b[3])<<32 | uint64(b[2])<<40 | uint64(b[1])<<48 | uint64(b[0])<<56
}

Let’s follow two bytes of output.addr.lo: addr[15] and addr[11]. Here is a simplified SSA form before late opt:

  v273 = Trunc64to8 <byte> v490                     ; byte(input.addr.lo)
  v226 = Trunc64to8 <byte> v225                     ; byte(input.addr.lo >> 32)
; […]
  v235 = Store <mem> {byte} v233 v226 v223          ; a16[11] = byte(lo >> 32)
  v247 = Store <mem> {byte} v245 v238 v235          ; a16[12] = …
  v259 = Store <mem> {byte} v257 v250 v247          ; a16[13] = …
  v271 = Store <mem> {byte} v269 v262 v259          ; a16[14] = …
  v282 = Store <mem> {byte} v280 v273 v271          ; a16[15] = byte(lo)
  v285 = LocalAddr <*[16]byte> {netip.addr} v2 v282 ; &addr
  v286 = Move <mem> {[16]byte} [16] v285 v22 v282   ; addr = a16
; […]
  v433 = OffPtr <*byte> [15] v285                   ; &addr[15]
  v435 = Load <byte> v433 v286                      ; addr[15]
  v479 = OffPtr <*byte> [11] v285                   ; &addr[11]
  v481 = Load <byte> v479 v286                      ; addr[11]

The first rule loads through the move: (Load (OffPtr [o] p) (Move p src mem)) => (Load (OffPtr [o] src) mem). It matches both loads, which now read a16 with the memory state before the copy:

  v600 = OffPtr <*byte> [15] v22 ; &a16[15]
  v435 = Load <byte> v600 v282   ; a16[15]
  v601 = OffPtr <*byte> [11] v22 ; &a16[11]
  v481 = Load <byte> v601 v282   ; a16[11]

The second rule shortcuts a load following a store: (Load p (Store p x _)) => x. It matches v435, as v282 stores a16[15]. It does not match v481: v235 stores a16[11] four stores earlier in the chain, while the variants of this rule look through three stores at most.

  v435 = Copy <byte> v273        ; byte(input.addr.lo)
  v601 = OffPtr <*byte> [11] v22 ; &a16[11]
  v481 = Load <byte> v601 v282   ; a16[11]

The same happens to the other bytes: the rule forwards the four bytes stored last, a16[12] to a16[15]. The twelve other loads now read a16 instead of addr.

BEUint64() becomes a chain of Or64, each one adding a byte shifted into place. memcombine is a pass written in Go, not a set of rewrite rules. It starts from the last Or64 of the chain and collects up to eight terms. If each term is a byte load, extended to 64 bits and shifted, and if the eight loads read consecutive addresses from the same pointer with the same memory state, it replaces the whole chain with a single 64-bit load and a byte swap. Otherwise, it tries again with four, then two terms, and from each intermediate Or64. Here is the loop checking each term in a simplified version of combineLoads():

for i := int64(0); i < n; i++ {
    v := a[i]
    shift := int64(0)
    if v.Op == shiftOp {
        v, shift = peelShift(v)
    }
    if v.Op != extOp {
        return false
    }
    load := v.Args[0]
    if load.Op != ssaop.OpLoad {
        return false
    }
    if load.Args[1] != mem {
        return false
    }
    p, off := splitPtr(load.Args[0])
    if p != base {
        return false
    }
    r[i] = LoadRecord{load: load, offset: off, shift: shift}
}

For output.addr.hi, the eight loads read a16 with the same memory state v282:

  v13  = Load <byte> v22 v282               ; a16[0]
  v530 = Load <byte> v14 v282               ; a16[1]
  v488 = Load <byte> v504 v282              ; a16[2]
  v405 = Load <byte> v537 v282              ; a16[3]
  v385 = Load <byte> v397 v282              ; a16[4]
  v361 = Load <byte> v373 v282              ; a16[5]
  v196 = Load <byte> v63 v282               ; a16[6]
  v432 = Load <byte> v315 v282              ; a16[7]
  v319 = ZeroExt8to64 <uint64> v432         ; uint64(a16[7])
  v329 = ZeroExt8to64 <uint64> v196         ; uint64(a16[6])
  v330 = Lsh64x64 <uint64> [true] v329 v138 ; uint64(a16[6]) << 8
  v331 = Or64 <uint64> v319 v330            ; a16[7] | a16[6] << 8
; […] same for a16[5] to a16[1]
  v401 = ZeroExt8to64 <uint64> v13          ; uint64(a16[0])
  v402 = Lsh64x64 <uint64> [true] v401 v55  ; uint64(a16[0]) << 56
  v403 = Or64 <uint64> v402 v391            ; | a16[0] << 56 = output.addr.hi

memcombine merges them into one load and a swap:

  v286 = Load <uint64> v22 v282   ; a16[:8]
  v285 = Bswap64 <uint64> v286    ; output.addr.hi

For output.addr.lo, here is the chain memcombine sees after late opt:

  v436 = ZeroExt8to64 <uint64> v273 ; addr[15], forwarded
  v448 = Or64 <uint64> v436 v447    ; | addr[14] << 8, forwarded
  v460 = Or64 <uint64> v459 v448    ; | addr[13] << 16, forwarded
  v472 = Or64 <uint64> v471 v460    ; | addr[12] << 24, forwarded
  v484 = Or64 <uint64> v483 v472    ; | a16[11] << 32, loaded
  v496 = Or64 <uint64> v495 v484    ; | a16[10] << 40, loaded
  v508 = Or64 <uint64> v507 v496    ; | a16[9] << 48, loaded
  v520 = Or64 <uint64> v519 v508    ; | a16[8] << 56, loaded

From v520, four of the eight terms are forwarded bytes, not loads from memory, and memcombine can’t combine them. It doesn’t merge the four remaining loads either, as they sit on top of the forwarded bytes.

Back in order

In summary, the rewriting rules run too early to be effective. A quick workaround exists: run an earlier round of memcombine before late opt. After this change, the generated code for the helper is back to the shortest possible version:

// AX = input.addr.hi, BX = input.addr.lo, CX = input.z
 CMPQ    net/netip·z4(SB), CX     ; check "z" if this is an IPv4 address
 JNE     end                      ; if not, stop here
 MOVQ    net/netip·z6noz(SB), CX  ; CX = netip.z6noz
end:
 RET
// return value = Addr{hi: AX, lo: BX, z: CX}

And the benchmark confirms it! ✌️

goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/vincentbernat/go-netip-addrto6
cpu: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core Processor
                   │   Go 1.26.8    │             Our branch              │
                   │     sec/op     │    sec/op     vs base               │
AddrTo6/safe          6.5470n ±  0%   0.8944n ± 4%  -86.34% (p=0.002 n=6)
AddrTo6/unsafe        0.9071n ±  3%   0.8682n ± 1%   -4.28% (p=0.002 n=6)
AddrTo6/builtin       0.8871n ±  2%   0.8785n ± 1%        ~ (p=0.310 n=6)

Next steps

I think Go maintainers would reject this change because of the additional memcombine pass. Instead, I plan to publish this blog post and bring up the subject again as a follow-up to issue #54365. Either the sheer complexity and the Go 1.27 regression convince the maintainers that adding a To6() method is simpler and more efficient, or they advise me on how to move forward. Either way, digging into this subject taught me a lot about the Go compiler! ⚙️

Update (2026-10)

I opened issue #81994 to propose Addr.To6(). Give it a 👍 if you want it in Go!

IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses let you handle only IPv6 addresses in your code and keep conversions at a few well-defined boundaries. I use them in Akvorado. ↩
This is not strictly equivalent. The zero value becomes :: while it would make more sense to leave it untouched. ↩
To avoid catastrophic bugs when netip.Addr’s layout changes, you must add tests to detect it. This is more dangerous if you put this code in a package. Either ask users to run the tests themselves, or detect the change at run time and panic. Hiding this optimization behind a build tag would make users aware of this potential trap. ↩
I produced the assembly code with GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.26.8 GOAMD64=v3 ./go-asm '\.asm' from the companion repository, then edited it a bit to keep this article from turning into an endless rabbit hole. Due to an unfortunate sequence of events, we switch between versions: Go 1.27 introduced a regression that blurs the point of this article. ↩
The function is short enough for the compiler to inline it, so the assembly code may vary depending on the surrounding code. ↩
MOVBEQ requires GOAMD64=v3, matching the x86-64-v3 microarchitecture from 2013. Otherwise, the compiler translates BEPutUint64() to BSWAPQ+MOVQ and BEUint64() to MOVQ+BSWAPQ. ↩
When the call is used as a statement, a struct literal alone is invalid. The patch then turns it into _ = netip.Addr{…}. ↩

The compiler can also write an HTML file with the result of each pass:

$ GOSSAFUNC=AddrTo6Safe \
> GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.26.8 \
> GOAMD64=v3 go build -a .
dumped SSA for AddrTo6Safe,1 to ./ssa.html

↩

Source line numbers in parentheses follow value identifiers, but I removed them from the examples. The SSA form also features branches, but we don’t need them to understand our optimizations. ↩