[LLVMdev] Reporting errors when applying fixups

[Jim Grosbach]

Yup, that’s the best option available right now. There’s limited support for adding a source location to the fixups so the diagnostic isn’t completely useless when coming from the assembler. There’s a proposal ongoing about improved diagnostics from the backend that Quentin is working on that will help here when it’s completed.

-Jim

On Dec 3, 2013, at 9:51 AM, David Peixotto <dpeixott at codeaurora.org> wrote:

> Matheus,
>  
> The ARM backend reports these kinds of errors using FatalError method of MCContext. You can see some examples in ARMAsmBackend.cpp (search for "out of range pc-relative fixup value").
>  
> -David
>  
> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Matheus Almeida
> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 5:37 AM
> To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: [LLVMdev] Reporting errors when applying fixups
>  
> For a target that hasn’t implemented branch relaxation (yet),  does anyone know what is the preferred way to report an error if a fixup cannot be applied because, for example, the destination of a branch is out of range?
> I suppose I could use asserts just like AArch64 is doing but that won’t stop the assembler of emitting a branch to an undesired location in release builds.
> Does anyone see any problem in using report_fatal_error to report errors in the target Asm backend ?
>  
> Regards,
> Matheus
>  
> Matheus Almeida
> MIPS processor IP
> www.imgtec.com
>  
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20131203/c137cf7e/attachment.html>