[PATCH] D14344: [WinEH] Set ExceptionPointerRegister for CoreCLR

[Reid Kleckner via llvm-commits]

rnk added a comment.

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D14344#282693, @JosephTremoulet wrote:

> It feels funny to leave around setExceptionPointerRegister if it's sometimes effectively ignored.  Grepping the in-tree targets, I just see 10 callers, 8 of which set to a constant value and 2 of which are parameterized on a property available on the TargetLowering, so updating those wouldn't seem to be much of a struggle (and likewise for ExceptionSelectorRegister).
>  Does that mean the Right Thing(TM) is to remove the backing field and update all the in-tree targets to encode the information in their override of the new virtual method instead, or is it better to just back off and leave the backing-field-based default implementation as you suggested, for the sake of out-of-tree target maintainers?


If you're up for updating all the in-tree targets and removing setExceptionPointerRegister, that's probably the right way to go.


http://reviews.llvm.org/D14344