similar to: [LLVMdev] unwind/invoke design

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Aaron Gray<aaronngray.lists at googlemail.com> wrote: >> The documentation of unwind/invoke is quite clear and does exactly >> what I need: unwinding the stack. I don't need it to carry an object >> back. I don't need it to figure out what the type of the object is or >> what catch() blocks it matches. I just need it to unwind

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Duncan Sands<baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > you can call the libgcc/libunwind routines directly.  There was an > example of this on the mailing list by Talin not long ago. I'll look into this. Thanks. > That said, > it wouldn't be too hard to support "unwind" in the code generators. > It would basically mean creating

Hi Wesley, > The documentation of unwind/invoke is quite clear and does exactly > what I need: unwinding the stack. I don't need it to carry an object > back. I don't need it to figure out what the type of the object is or > what catch() blocks it matches. I just need it to unwind the stack. > The rest is my job as a part of the runtime. Unfortunately, I have > learned

> The documentation of unwind/invoke is quite clear and does exactly > what I need: unwinding the stack. I don't need it to carry an object > back. I don't need it to figure out what the type of the object is or > what catch() blocks it matches. I just need it to unwind the stack. > The rest is my job as a part of the runtime. Unfortunately, I have > learned that while

Florian Weimer wrote: > * Wesley W. Terpstra: > >> The documentation of unwind/invoke is quite clear and does exactly >> what I need: unwinding the stack. I don't need it to carry an object >> back. I don't need it to figure out what the type of the object is or >> what catch() blocks it matches. I just need it to unwind the stack. > > You can use your

* Wesley W. Terpstra: > The documentation of unwind/invoke is quite clear and does exactly > what I need: unwinding the stack. I don't need it to carry an object > back. I don't need it to figure out what the type of the object is or > what catch() blocks it matches. I just need it to unwind the stack. You can use your stack switching mechanism for this purpose.

Hi, I want to support the unwind instruction on x86. Specifically I want to: * Provide an efficient runtime implementation that does not depend on reading the DWARF EH information. * It should be self hosted, meaning the runtime is static linked in. I want to use it kernel mode. * Unwinding should be a read-only operation regarding the stack, so I can create a stack dump in the

Hi Bjarke, > * Provide an efficient runtime implementation that does not > depend on reading the DWARF EH information. why? The DWARF EH info encodes two things: (1) how to restore registers; and (2) matching rules for exception objects, and what to do with them. You will need something along the lines of (1) if you unwind out of the middle of functions. As for (2), if you

After much delay, I have finally reached the point in my work where I need to implement some kind of exception handling. I understand that "unwind" is currently unimplemented and will remain so for the forseeable future. In the mean time, are there any examples available for implementing Java or Python-style exceptions using __cxa_throw or something similar? I've read and

Hello, Bjarke > * Provide a pass that raises C++ exception handling to just > unwind instructions and thread-local data. Are you familiar with C++ EH? How would you handle catches? Cleanups? > Other call frames might be more complex to handle. It depends on the > moves needed to restore the registers of the previous call frame (the > caller) and to remove the current frame.

Can you point out to me where in the VMKit code I should be looking? I spent some additional time reading the docs, and I have some specific questions: 1) I'm trying to figure out the relationship between the __cxa_throw function, and the _Unwind_RaiseException function mentioned in the ABI doc. My guess is that _Unwind_RaiseException is the language-neutral implementation of stack unwinding,

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 2:19 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi, > > > Can anyone tell me if invoke/unwind is stable in 2.3? I'm seeing some > > really weird stuff -- unwinds are ending up in seemingly arbitrary > places... > > definitely not inside the caller's unwind block My target is x86. > > codegen doesn't know how to

On 2009-06-15 20:26, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Aaron > Gray<aaronngray.lists at googlemail.com> wrote: > >>> The documentation of unwind/invoke is quite clear and does exactly >>> what I need: unwinding the stack. I don't need it to carry an object >>> back. I don't need it to figure out what the type of the

2009/6/15 Török Edwin <edwintorok at gmail.com>: > Write some C++ code into llvm.org/demo, and watch the output assembly, That shows how to use the c++ runtime for handling c++ style exceptions. More useful might be an llvm implementation of __cxa_throw, which I could then modify. ;)

Hi Duncan, Hi Bjarke, Duncan Sands wrote: > Take a look at libunwind (http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/linux/libunwind/). > Another possibility, very close you yours and currently used by the vmkit > project, is to modify all functions so they return two values, the usual > return value and an additional boolean value indicating whether an exception > was thrown during the call or

So, I remember we discussed this earlier this year, but I can't find the thread. The idea is to move libunwind into compiler-rt for the simple reasons below: 1. Unwinding is not exclusive to C++, nor exception handling. 2. Clang still includes libgcc_s and libgcc_eh when using compiler-rt (maybe eh isn't needed, but it was there for libgcc). 3. Testing the libunwind with libc++ on ARM is

Jon Harrop wrote: > > Is it? I was just reading the documentation about LLVM's exception > handling > and it sounded ideal for my needs. How much of it does not work as the > docs > imply? > Jon, I ran into this issue in September and re-ignited this discussion in another thread, here: http://www.nabble.com/Unwinds-Gone-Wild-td18747589.html

On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 8:39 PM Martin Storsjö <martin at martin.st> wrote: > Hi, > > > On Sat, 15 Aug 2020, Ivan Serdyuk wrote: > > > Just as Shoaib said, libunwind only is useful in environments > > that use > > the Itanium C++ ABI - there's really no use for it in an MSVC > > context > > (either using MSVC or

Hi Talin, > 1) I'm trying to figure out the relationship between the __cxa_throw > function, and the _Unwind_RaiseException function mentioned in the ABI doc. > My guess is that _Unwind_RaiseException is the language-neutral > implementation of stack unwinding, and __cxa_throw is the C++ exception > semantics that are implemented on top of it. If that is the case, should I >

> On 18 Nov 2019, at 19:55, Peter Smith <peter.smith at linaro.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 15:23, Sergej Jaskiewicz <jaskiewiczs at icloud.com <mailto:jaskiewiczs at icloud.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi Peter, >> >> Thanks for your response. >> >> On 18 Nov 2019, at 17:44, Peter Smith <peter.smith at linaro.org> wrote: