On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:58 PM, Dana Jansens <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The setjump-longjump is similar to this. It does not use the lower level
> libunwind APIs and it has its own phase1/phase2 unwinding code separate from
> the Itanium style. So, it makes sense to me for the ARM EHABI
> implementation to be in its own Unwind-ehabi.c file and do not use libunwind
> under it. This was part of why I thought of EHABI as being a different
> unwinder than the zero-cost unwinder in terms of _LIBUNWIND_BUILD_blah.
>
> We discussed making a change like that, but we're more concerned with
> upstreaming first right now, rather than keeping this all on a private repo.
> Since the way we developed this was sharing code with the itanium
> implementation as much as possible, are you okay with upstreaming it in this
> fashion and then looking at moving it away in the future?
>
Can you be more specific about what you mean by “in this fashion” and “moving
it away in the future”.
-Nick
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
