Am Wed, 08 Jan 2014 08:37:43 +0000 schrieb "Timo Sintonen" <t.sinto...@luukku.com>:
> On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:21:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote: > > On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:06:48 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote: > > > >> I should really start pushing my local ARM changes upstream. > >> Here's a > >> fix for the EABI unwinder: > >> https://github.com/jpf91/GDC/commit/262e432e95cbe31a6764cd337f64022a56011eda > >> > >> IIRC I also thought the code in gcc/deh.d wasn't correct. As > >> it wouldn't > >> work for the eabi unwinder anyway (no Phase1Info member) I > >> didn't > >> investigate that though. > > > > Meanwhile I got it to pass with this: > > align(8) int _pad; > > > Exceptions still not working. The code call the unwind routine in > libgcc but that never calls back to personality routine. Neither > it resumes to the error callback nor abort. > > There are several addresses in tables like the call to cleanup > code and jump to the catch routine. Are they called in libgcc > side or in personality routine? I was just wondering if thumb > mode has been taken into account. > > Cortex processors have only the 16 bit 'thumb' instruction set. > This is indicated by setting the lsb of the address to 1 in any > address that is used in jumps or calls or any address loads to > pc. If the lsb is 0 it will result to illegal instruction fault > in Cortex. > > When compiling with -mthumb the compiler always sets this bit for > any address and there is a separate libgcc for thumb mode. When > calculating address offsets from exception tables the compiler > can not know they are used as jump addresses. It may be possible > that callback functions are called in wrong mode. > > Any thoughts? Stupid question, but are C++ exceptions working for you? I think we don't change anything inthe compiler related to exception handling, so if C++ worked and D didn't it could only be a problem with the runtime code?
