similar to: [LLVMdev] how to resolve llvm exception IR?

Hi, catch_all.cpp: 1 int main() 2 { 3 try { 4 throw 34; 5 } 6 catch (...) {} 7 } llvm-gcc -O3 -S -emit-llvm catch_all.cpp -o catch_all.ll: 1 ; ModuleID = 'catch_all.cpp' 2 target datalayout =

Hi Dale, > No, I don't want to change the semantics of invoke, at least I don't > think so. > When inlining, I want the inlined throw to reach cleanup code as it > does. > But I want the Unwind_Resume call that ends the cleanup code to be > replaced with a control transfer to the handler (or cleanup) in the > calling > function, i.e. the inliner needs to know

This is a revision of the second exception handling proposal I sent out. You can see it here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2010-November/036484.html After much discussion, there are some changes to the proposal – some significant and some minor. One major point, this proposal does not address the issue of catching an exception thrown from a non-invoke instruction. However if done

On Dec 1, 2010, at 1:37 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Executive summary > ----------------- > > Remove the personality and list of catches out of eh.selector and stick them > directly on invoke instructions. > > The invoke instruction > ---------------------- > > The invoke instruction is modified by adding extra catch info to it: > > <result> = invoke

I have a couple of questions/concerns. The main one has to do with the opacity of exception types - in other words, will it still be true that the exception types are opaque identifiers, and are only interpreted by the personality function? Since my object representations are not C++-like, I am not using any of the cxa_* C++ library functions. Instead, my code calls the _Unwind functions

Hi zhangzw, ... > 59 %3 = invoke > %"struct.std::basic_ostream<char,std::char_traits<char> >"* > @_ZStlsISt11char_traitsIcEERSt13basic_ostreamIcT_ES5_PKc(%"struct.std::basic_ostream<char,std::char_traits<char> > >"* @_ZSt4cout, i8* getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str, i32 0, i32 0)) > 60 to label %bb6

On Dec 1, 2010, at 10:20 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Bill, this proposal seems strangely complicated. I don't see the advantage > of the dispatch instruction over just attaching the information to each invoke. > Right now you have > > invoke void @_Z3foov() > to label %invcont unwind label %catch.handlers > > catch.handlers: landingpad > dispatch resume

I've been looking into a new way to implement exception handling in LLVM. The current model has many disadvantages, in my opinion. I try to address them with this proposal. I also try to make exception handling much more understandable to the normal human reader. :-) Any new proposal will need to address all present and future languages' exception handling methodologies. I

Hi Bill, this proposal seems strangely complicated. I don't see the advantage of the dispatch instruction over just attaching the information to each invoke. Right now you have invoke void @_Z3foov() to label %invcont unwind label %catch.handlers catch.handlers: landingpad dispatch resume to label %... catches [ %struct.__fundamental_type_info_pseudo* @_ZTIi, label

Hi Dale, > #include <cstdio> > class A { > public: > A() {} > ~A() {} > }; > void f() { > A a; > throw 5.0; > } > main() { > try { > f(); > } catch(...) { printf("caught\n"); } > } this example indeed shows the problem. Let me explain to see if we agree on what the problem is. Suppose we don't artificially

Here is an alternative proposal to Bill's. It is closer to what we already have (which can be seen as a good or a bad thing!), and is also closer to what gcc does. It is more incremental than Bill's and introduces fewer new concepts. Executive summary ----------------- Remove the personality and list of catches out of eh.selector and stick them directly on invoke instructions. The

HI all, here is a llvm IR : invoke void @__cxa_throw(i8* %7, i8* bitcast (%struct.__fundamental_type_info_pseudo* @_ZTIi to i8*), void (i8*)* null) noreturn to label %invcont unwind label %lpad say I want to get the Invoke's Operand's name, I use getOperand(i)->getName(), it can work for that the Operand hasname, but some Operand hasn't name, So, My problem is how

Hi Duncan, >>are you trying to get the name "@_ZTIi" or "@__cxa_throw"? yes! i want get the name @_ZTi or @__cxa_throw, the latter @__cxa_throw i can get it throw value->getName(), but the @_ZTi it did n't has name! zhangzw thanks 2009/3/26 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr>: > Hi zhangzw, > >> invoke void @__cxa_throw(i8* %7, i8*

On Dec 9, 2007, at 1:01 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Dale, > >> #include <cstdio> >> class A { >> public: >> A() {} >> ~A() {} >> }; >> void f() { >> A a; >> throw 5.0; >> } >> main() { >> try { >> f(); >> } catch(...) { printf("caught\n"); } >> } > > this example

Hi zhangzw, > invoke void @__cxa_throw(i8* %7, i8* bitcast > (%struct.__fundamental_type_info_pseudo* @_ZTIi to i8*), void (i8*)* > null) > noreturn to label %invcont unwind label %lpad > > say I want to get the Invoke's Operand's name are you trying to get the name "@_ZTIi" or "@__cxa_throw"? Ciao, Duncan.

Hi zhangzw, >> invoke void @__cxa_throw(i8* %7, i8* bitcast >> (%struct.__fundamental_type_info_pseudo* @_ZTIi to i8*), void (i8*)* >> null) >> noreturn to label %invcont unwind label %lpad > > >>are you trying to get the name "@_ZTIi" or "@__cxa_throw"? > > yes! i want get the name @_ZTi or @__cxa_throw, > the latter

The poor interaction between exception handling and inlining in LLVM is one of the main motivations for the new exception handling models proposed recently. Here I give my analysis of the origin of the problem in the hope of clarifying the situation. Soon after dwarf exception handling was implemented in LLVM, I noticed that some programs would fail when compiled at -O3, for example the

Jakub Staszak wrote: > Hi, > > It looks like PDT.getRootNode() returns NULL for: > > define fastcc void @c974001__lengthy_calculation. > 1736(%struct.FRAME.c974001* nocapture %CHAIN.185) noreturn { > entry: > br label %bb > > bb: > br label %bb > } > > > Isn't it a bug in PostDominatorTree? > > Please note that this crashes: >

On Dec 2, 2010, at 2:21 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Bill, > >> This is similar to my first proposal. > > yup, I still consider your first proposal to have been basically sound. > > But it also suffers from a major problem, >> which stopped that proposal dead in its tracks. Namely, you have information in >> one place which needs to be shared in two

Hello, Bug is already fixed by Chris (see: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4915) . I added getRootNode() == NULL condition to my patch. It's not a great solution, but it is enough for now I think. New patch attached. -Jakub -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: dse_ssu-2.patch Type: application/octet-stream Size: 17762 bytes Desc: not