Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 19:19:41 +0200 From: Olavi Kumpulainen <olavi.m.kumpulainen@gmail.com> To: Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: C++ exceptions in freebsd-arm doesn't seem to work Message-ID: <F4EE79A6-9D99-4EE1-9452-2C7ECF963646@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1408472517.56408.659.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> References: <BEAC4CFB-EC4F-456D-8173-2E34CCE3A2C1@gmail.com> <1405809318.85788.35.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <1406063473.71975.8.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <53D2CFBE.3040207@fgznet.ch> <834BA562-84ED-425C-9D61-0A235A28A94A@gmail.com> <1408472517.56408.659.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 19 Aug 2014, at 20:21 , Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Tue, 2014-08-19 at 19:40 +0200, Olavi Kumpulainen wrote: >> On 25 Jul 2014, at 23:44 , Andreas Tobler <andreast-list@fgznet.ch> = wrote: >>=20 >>> On 22.07.14 23:11, Ian Lepore wrote: >>>> On Sat, 2014-07-19 at 16:35 -0600, Ian Lepore wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 2014-06-07 at 14:12 +0200, Olavi Kumpulainen wrote: >>>>>> [c++ exceptions don't work and related discussion] >>>>>=20 >>>>> I checked in a partial fix for c++ exception handling in r268893. = It >>>>> fixes the specific problem you detailed above, which was = essentially >>>>> that the __gnu_Unwind_Find_exidx() function was not available in = any >>>>> shared library, making the unwinder fall back to using the = __exidx_start >>>>> and end symbols, which are only valid in a statically-linked app. >>>>>=20 >>>>> With the new function in place, exceptions are closer to working = with >>>>> gcc 4.2.1, but still don't work with clang. With gcc, some things = work >>>>> and some things don't. For example if you throw an exception and = in the >>>>> same function have a catch with the right specific type it = segfaults, >>>>> but a catch(...) will catch it without problems. But you can = catch an >>>>> exception by type if the catch is in a function higher up the call = chain >>>>> from the place it was thrown. >>>>>=20 >>>>> We're continuing to debug this at $work, and welcome any input if = anyone >>>>> else makes progress with it. Right now we still don't know = whether the >>>>> segfaults are because of bad unwinder library code or bad unwind = data >>>>> emitted by gcc. (I sure hope it's the library, because that's = easier to >>>>> fix.) >>>>>=20 >>>>> On the clang front, it has been said that c++ exceptions work in = clang >>>>> 3.5, so we tried the clang-devel port, and it didn't just work. = But it >>>>> turns out that port hasn't been updated for quite a while, so we = may not >>>>> have tested the code that's supposed to work right. While trying = that I >>>>> discovered that clang 3.5 isn't scheduled for release for about = another >>>>> year, so that really isn't a viable solution for anyone with = near-term >>>>> needs, unless the required changes can be cherry-picked and = brought into >>>>> our version of 3.4. >>>>>=20 >>>>> -- Ian >>>>=20 >>>> Another update to this... today I committed r268993 and r268994, = and now >>>> I believe arm eabi c++ exceptions are fully working with gcc. I = haven't >>>> run an extensive test suite, but all the test cases we've been = using at >>>> $work to debug this now work correctly. >>>=20 >>> Thank you! Confirmed. My test cases which are working with gcc-4.10 = are now also working with the system gcc, 4.2.1. >>> I totally forgot about this change. I have it in my local gcc tree = since a while but I forgot about..... >>>=20 >>> Andreas >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >> Please excuse my late reply. I=A2ve been away from keyboard for a = while. >>=20 >> I back-ported r268893, r268993 and r268994 to stable/10 for = beaglebone. C++ exceptions works for static builds, but not for binaries = linked to shared libs. >>=20 >> Since this seems to work ok in HEAD, I=A2m obviously missing = something. Do any of you guys have any ideas? >>=20 >> Cheers >>=20 >=20 > I'm not sure what you mean by "backported to stable/10", I merged all > the necessary changes to stable-10 as r269792 on Aug 10. Are you > working with a checkout from earlier than that? If so, just updating > should fix it for you. >=20 > -- Ian >=20 >=20 Updating to stable-10 as of today didn=A2t help. I=A2m running a clean = checkout except for a couple of drivers in the kernel. This makes me think I have a bad src.conf - How shall I configure the = build for this to work? /Olavi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F4EE79A6-9D99-4EE1-9452-2C7ECF963646>