This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: sjlj-exceptions ICE. simplified test case
- To: "Richard Henderson" <rth at cygnus dot com>,"Robert Lipe" <robertl at sco dot com>
- Subject: Re: sjlj-exceptions ICE. simplified test case
- From: "Geert Bosch" <bosch at gnat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 10:14:03 -0400
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,"gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Reply-To: "Geert Bosch" <bosch at gnat dot com>
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:49:27 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
I wonder if we shouldn't work to ban sjlj for gcc 3.0. Even
on a.out targets we can support dwarf2 unwind tables through
collect2.
Especially in the context of embedded systems, the space overhead of unwind
tables may not be acceptable, so banning sjlj support is a bad thing for those
targets. Another issue is that in some cases it might be necessary to have support
for propagating exceptions through foreign code without any tables at all.
(As somebody once said: if you find yourself wanting to remove a feature... :-)
Apart from these two concerns, there is one problem with the unwind tables
that may be fixable, or might be fixed already. At least on SGI it used to
be the case that during program initialization all addresses in unwind tables
were patched up, which caused excessive startup delays because of swapping, even
though the actual application itself has a working set that easily fits in
memory. (This is for *huge* executables.)
-Geert