bcraig added a subscriber: bcraig. bcraig added a comment. > We could, on the other hand, do this tightening for all the supported > architectures (for the new, native-only libunwind build suggested by > @jroelofs) with appropriate asserts in place so that we maintain these tight > bounds as we move forward. Not sure if that effort would be worth though, > given that for most non-ARM targets, unwinder stack usage is not a huge > concern.
libunwind doesn't currently support Hexagon, but it has been investigated some there. Hexagon would care about stack usage as well. I wouldn't be surprised if some embedded MIPS and Power targets also cared. I don't think any of those targets come close to using 1K for their unwind context. http://reviews.llvm.org/D19920 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
