search for: _unwind_

...the reference to the exception structure.", but later down it says "To express this in LLVM code the landing pad will call llvm.eh.selector. The arguments are the length of the filter expression (the number of type infos plus one) ...". This seems contradictory. If I am calling the _Unwind_ functions directly, do I need to use any of the llvm.eh.* functions? Can I just use invoke and write my own landing pad? How do you handle throwing an exception with a catch handler in the same function? Invoke won't work since it assumes that the exception is being thrown in a subroutine. --...

...o the corresponding catch-clause the lifetimes of these hard registers ostensibly starts at the LandingpadInst, but for purposes of PHI lowering and Register Allocation they _must_ actually start at the beginning of the BasicBlock -- since that is where control flow will return to from the _Unwind_RaiseException / __gcc_personality_v0 calls, and it is the _Unwind_ and _personality_ functions that physically set those hard registers, not the "LandingpadInst". Somehow PHI lowering and register allocation need to be prohibited from using those hard registers for spill code at the be...

...unwinding. I guess you are saying we need to move > the unwinders symbols out into a libgcc_ext and use that in the > linkage on 10.6 or later so the FSF unwinder is used instead of > the system one? > Jack The important thing is that only one unwinder is used. The _Unwind_Context data structure is different between the darwin and FSF implementations, so you can't pass it between two different implementations. Since darwin uses two-level namespace and swapping in a new libgcc_s.dylib at runtime is not going to effect the various OS dylibs that are lookin...

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:28:15AM -0700, Nick Kledzik wrote: > So, when these test cases are run, is the binary linked against /usr/ > lib/libgcc_s.10.5.dylib? or against some just built libgcc_s.10.5.dylib? > or against some just build libgcc_s.dylib? If either of the latter, then > if you changed the FSF build of libgcc_s for darwin to have the right > magic symbols, then

...t; catch-clause > > the lifetimes of these hard registers ostensibly starts at the LandingpadInst, > but for purposes of PHI lowering and Register Allocation they _must_ actually > start at the beginning of the BasicBlock -- since that is where control flow will > return to from the _Unwind_RaiseException / __gcc_personality_v0 calls, > and it is the _Unwind_ and _personality_ functions that physically set those > hard registers, not the "LandingpadInst". > > Somehow PHI lowering and register allocation need to be prohibited from > using those hard registers f...

On 29/03/13 18:34, David Chisnall wrote: > handlers, and so on), and a generic structure for the unwind library. > It then passes it to _Unwind_RaiseException(), which is the generic > unwind routine. Excuse me if this sounds silly, but what "library" does the _Unwind_ series of functions come from? Is this a kind of target ABI instrinsic library, or must I link with a particular runtime library to get these functions? I assu...

...etween the "invoke-block" and the "landingpad-block", and if we do then isn't there the possibility of the register allocator spilling the contents of the exception registers from within the newly created block --- but this block won't ever get executed because the _Unwind_ / _personality_ functions will cause control flow to go directly to the block with the LandingpadInst ? If you really want to split a landingpad-edge won't you have to move the LandingpadInst up into the new block ? if this is true (and I seem to be making a lot of logic errors lately...

...hese hard registers ostensibly starts at the >> LandingpadInst, >> but for purposes of PHI lowering and Register Allocation they >> _must_ actually >> start at the beginning of the BasicBlock -- since that is where >> control flow will >> return to from the _Unwind_RaiseException / __gcc_personality_v0 >> calls, >> and it is the _Unwind_ and _personality_ functions that physically >> set those >> hard registers, not the "LandingpadInst". >> >> Somehow PHI lowering and register allocation need to be prohibited...

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:13:52AM -0700, Nick Kledzik wrote: > > The important thing is that only one unwinder is used. The > _Unwind_Context data structure is different between the darwin and FSF > implementations, so you can't pass it between two different > implementations. Since darwin uses two-level namespace and swapping in > a new libgcc_s.dylib at runtime is not going to effect the various OS > dyli...

...IT and GCC linked. I'm trying to figure out what this is now. On 11/04/13 06:06, edA-qa mort-ora-y wrote: > I have some exception handling which works fine using the JIT. Now I am > producing object files and linking them, but the exception handling > tables seem to be missing. I call _Unwind_RaiseException and get > _URC_END_OF_STACK as a result. > > I produce my object file using TargetMachine::addPassesToEmitFile and > then I link my resulting files with: > > gcc -o prog input.o -fexceptions > > I'm sure I'm just missing some option to generate the D...

...row() function is responsible for allocating an exception structure that contains two things, the C++ information (such as the thrown object, its type_info, the current values of the terminate and unexpected handlers, and so on), and a generic structure for the unwind library. It then passes it to _Unwind_RaiseException(), which is the generic unwind routine. The _Unwind_RaiseException() function walks up the stack, invoking the personality routine once to find a landing pad for a catch. If it fails to find one then it returns an error. If it succeeds, then it invokes them again to run cleanup c...

I'm trying to add some basic exception handling to my language now and I'm uncertain of how I actually start the exception propagation. It appears that "resume" will continue the exception, but I see no mention of how the exception actually starts. If I look at the IR output of a simple C++ program I see that it calls @__cxa_throw, but that is a library function. Somehow I must

On 31 Jan 2014, at 08:12, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > - There is the core runtime library. Historically this was called 'compiler-rt' informally, but perhaps better called 'libclang_rt', which provides the core necessary runtime library facilities to compile C or C++ applications. It's analogous to libgcc but without some of the unwinding code

I have some exception handling which works fine using the JIT. Now I am producing object files and linking them, but the exception handling tables seem to be missing. I call _Unwind_RaiseException and get _URC_END_OF_STACK as a result. I produce my object file using TargetMachine::addPassesToEmitFile and then I link my resulting files with: gcc -o prog input.o -fexceptions I'm sure I'm just missing some option to generate the Dwarf tables, but I can't figure out...