Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "flag_except".
2007 Aug 29
4
[LLVMdev] RFC: Patch for Exceptions
...========
--- gcc/llvm-backend.cpp (revision 41554)
+++ gcc/llvm-backend.cpp (working copy)
@@ -122,9 +122,6 @@
Args.push_back("--debug-pass=Structure");
if (flag_debug_pass_arguments)
Args.push_back("--debug-pass=Arguments");
-// Breaks the x86-darwin build
-// if (flag_exceptions)
-// Args.push_back("--enable-eh");
// If there are options that should be passed through to the LLVM backend
// directly from the command line, do so now. This is mainly for debugging
[bwendling:llvm-eh] svn diff gcc/config/linux.h
Index: gcc/config/linux.h
===============...
2007 Apr 06
1
[LLVMdev] Integrating LLVM in an existing project
...ake a .bc file, run it
> through the JIT, see how it explodes :)
the compiler fails to build if you do that :-/
The attached patch helps a bit but it needs more work.
Also, I suppose you might need to uncomment this bit in llvm-backend.cpp
as well:
// Disabled until PR1224 is resolved.
//if (flag_exceptions)
// Args.push_back("--enable-eh");
Some comments on the patch:
(1)
new UnreachableInst(CurBB);
+ } else {
+ new UnwindInst(UnwindBB);
}
-#endif
+#else
new UnwindInst(UnwindBB);
+#endif
This avoid generating an unwind instruction straight after an unreacha...
2007 Apr 06
0
[LLVMdev] Integrating LLVM in an existing project
On Fri, 6 Apr 2007, Nicolas Geoffray wrote:
> Like you say, it's not functional for non-calls instructions. Besides,
> having to change all CalInst to InvokeInst is just too much pain in our
> current vm.
ok.
> Actually, why is it missing? What's the difference between the code
> generator and the JIT?
There are two things missing:
1. Testing and working out the set
2007 Apr 06
2
[LLVMdev] Integrating LLVM in an existing project
Hi Chris,
Chris Lattner wrote:
>> We can not use current exception handling in llvm, see
>> http://www.nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExceptionHandlingChanges.txt.
>>
>
> Why not?
>
>
Like you say, it's not functional for non-calls instructions. Besides,
having to change
all CalInst to InvokeInst is just too much pain in our current vm.
> There are two