This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: S/390: Default to -fasynchronous-unwind-tables


> On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 02:13:10PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > Should we be thinking about doing this on more architectures?  It would
> > be nice to use this in preference to the terrifying MIPS-specific
> > unwinder, for instance...
> 
> No.  Nor should it have been done for s390 IMO.  Who cares if
> you can't get a backtrace without debug information?

It is told to be important for garbage collectors used by JITs and
similar tricks.

Honza
> 
> > How bad is the space penalty,
> 
> > ... and is there a way to mark EH tables as
> > removable if they're only needed for debugging (vs. for -fexceptions)?
> 
> Duh, no.  That's what .debug_frame is for -- debugging.
> 
> 
> r~


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]