search for: uw_identify_context

Hi Dale, > > this is the bit I don't understand. Why does it go > > into a loop? How can the unwinder possibly know that > > the original code did not have a catch-all, since we > > tell it which catches there are and we say: there is > > a catch-all! > > The unwinder works by doing a stack crawl to find a handler. Since > we're telling it

...urces for that matter; libgcc lives in a separate repository these days): Index: gcc/unwind-dw2.c =================================================================== --- gcc/unwind-dw2.c (revision 124749) +++ gcc/unwind-dw2.c (working copy) @@ -1526,7 +1526,7 @@ static inline _Unwind_Ptr uw_identify_context (struct _Unwind_Context *context) { - return _Unwind_GetIP (context); + return _Unwind_GetCFA (context); } I'm uncertain of the merit of this patch, but it's in shipping Leopard and works with gcc, so we're stuck with it. The effect of this is that llvm's strategy of makin...

...eparate repository these days): Yuck :) > Index: gcc/unwind-dw2.c > =================================================================== > --- gcc/unwind-dw2.c (revision 124749) > +++ gcc/unwind-dw2.c (working copy) > @@ -1526,7 +1526,7 @@ > static inline _Unwind_Ptr > uw_identify_context (struct _Unwind_Context *context) > { > - return _Unwind_GetIP (context); > + return _Unwind_GetCFA (context); > } > > I'm uncertain of the merit of this patch, but it's in shipping > Leopard and works with gcc, so we're > stuck with it. Right, this is eff...

On Sep 17, 2009, at 6:03 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Bill, > >>>> Yeah. The logic will need tweaking for sure. I'm also concerned >>>> about the >>>> _Unwind_resume() call. GCC emits a call site region for it in the >>>> exception >>>> table. We...kind of do that. It looks like it's being included in >>>>