search for: danalbert

Hi Nick! In r207467 you added code(libunwind: DwarfInstructions.hpp): assert(lastReg <= (int)cieInfo.returnAddressRegister && "register range does not contain return address register"); for (int i = 0; i <= lastReg; ++i) { ..... else if (i == (int)cieInfo.returnAddressRegister) There is misprint here: lastReg should be >=

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: > >> Shouldn't it just use the default unwinder for the given platform? >> > > Sure, but what is the default unwinder for a given platform? > > Lets go with Linux. I have two different images (okay, I have one, but Im > sufficiently famili...

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org > > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: >> >>> Shouldn't it just use the default unwinder for...

...to thinking libunwind is a better default for --rtlib=compiler-rt. Reason being that --rtlib=compiler-rt means libgcc probably isn't even available. On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool < >> compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Shouldn...

I'm not sure that test have ever been run through LIT. It was tested on Android, but I don't have LIT tweaked for libc++abi the same way I do for libc++, so it was built outside of LIT and run manually. On Oct 27, 2014 11:41 AM, "Jonathan Roelofs" <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote: > > > On 10/27/14 11:39 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > > Right now, there's

...tions. First, how do I know which build slaves to use? Is it okay to just pick a few, is there some policy defining which are fair game, or do I need to add a new one? Second, is there a simple way to test the builder and config before I commit it? Here's my first attempt: https://github.com/DanAlbert/zorg/commit/2ff832f710982c487174e507bb2a2704248fe821 Thanks, Dan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140801/07cc7a99/attachment.html>

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org > > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> >> wrote: >> >>> What about the default unwinder for C...

On 31 Jan 2015, at 03:02, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: > > Talked it over with Saleem on IRC, and I've come around to thinking libunwind is a better default for --rtlib=compiler-rt. Reason being that --rtlib=compiler-rt means libgcc probably isn't even available. On FreeBSD, we install compiler-rt as libgcc (or,...

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> > wrote: > >> What about the default unwinder for Compiler-RT? Should we assume our >> own? Gcc's? Assuming nothing will break compilation, since the libraries >> won't be available...

On 31 Jan 2015, at 03:02, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: > Talked it over with Saleem on IRC, and I've come around to thinking libunwind is a better default for --rtlib=compiler-rt. Reason being that --rtlib=compiler-rt means libgcc probably isn't even available. It's not just that, it's about making it self-c...

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > 2. We need to clarify how libstdc++ and libsupc++ can be used as > > libc++'s ABI library and explicitly define the level of support for > > these configurations. Are there any people using this functionality? > > These configurations have been broken for GCC >= 4.9.2 and I haven't

On 20 October 2014 18:03, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote: >> Is that what you had in mind? > Yes, this looks good to me. Great, in r220210. I'll set up the bot. Thanks! --renato

On Jan 31, 2015 08:42, "Jonathan Roelofs" <jroelofs.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > My worry is the scenario of throwing in one dso, then running a cleanup as you're unwinding through another dso. If that cleanup throws, and invokes a different unwinder, there's no way for that second unwinder to know about the state of the first. If this were c++, we'd break the

> > But on the Libc++AndAbiBuilder, there's no way to set the CMake > argument (or is there?): No, there isn't. Should be simple enough to add though. I'd add it as a dict param. On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com > wrote: > +Dan Albert > > On 10/20/14 4:53 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > > Folks, > > >

Hi All, Currently libc++ does not list linux as a supported platform. This should change. I think we should be able to list linux (with libc++abi) as a supported configuration. but there are some issues I would like to see resolved first. 1. We should add CMake support for building libc++ against a static libc++abi. If libc++ is linked to a shared libc++abi the resulting library can only be used

On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:43 PM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote: > It would be nice if we had some libunwind-specific tests too. Currently we have none, other than the c++ abi tests. Nick, does Apple have any they're willing to upstream? Here is what Apple has: http://opensource.apple.com/source/libunwind/libunwind-35.3/testsuite/ If you think these are

On 1/31/15 5:36 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 31 Jan 2015, at 03:02, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: >> Talked it over with Saleem on IRC, and I've come around to thinking libunwind is a better default for --rtlib=compiler-rt. Reason being that --rtlib=compiler-rt means libgcc probably isn't even available. > > It's not just that, it's about mak...

On 04/08/2014 16:20, Dmitri Gribenko wrote: > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Dan Liew <dan at su-root.co.uk> wrote: >>>> Second, is there a simple way to test the builder and config before I >>>> commit >>>> it? >>> >>> I am afraid not. >>> >> >> But there is a ugly (and certainly not simple) way to partially test