[llvm] r251904 - [X86] Generate .cfi_adjust_cfa_offset correctly when pushing arguments

[Kuperstein, Michael M via llvm-commits]

Ok.
Any ideas for an option name that won’t be confusing (w.r.t –fasynchronous-unwind-tables) ?

Michael


From: Reid Kleckner [mailto:rnk at google.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 18:23
To: Rafael Espíndola
Cc: Kuperstein, Michael M; llvm-commits; Frederic Riss; Smith, Kevin B; Kreitzer, David L
Subject: Re: [llvm] r251904 - [X86] Generate .cfi_adjust_cfa_offset correctly when pushing arguments

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:22 AM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com<mailto:rafael.espindola at gmail.com>> wrote:

Please don't. Every time I have seen that flag used the intention was to omit the eh_frame section completely.

I think the two reasonable solutions are to always emit precise info (modulo bugs) or to have a *new* command line to enable imprecise mode.
I agree, I've looked into the meaning of -fasynchronous-unwind-tables, and for GCC that just controls the emission of .eh_frame. Their CFI is always precise at every instruction, bugs aside. I think we should do the same.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20151108/8204e274/attachment.html>