On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Olivier Hainque <hain...@adacore.com> wrote: > > On May 14, 2012, at 15:14 , David Edelsohn wrote: >> Yes, something like that test. >> >> Should the test go in g++.dg/eh or in g++.target/powerpc? > > It's really about the general capability to have unwinding get > through signal handlers. The same test (same sources) should work on > other targets than powerpc where the unwinding fallback is defined, > so the first option looks like a better choice. > > In principle, we could extend the dg target filtering to those > processor/os combinations that have proper unwinding-through handler > support, thanks to a libgcc fallback or other facilities.
I agree that the test is more general. If you add more targets to the list, it definitely makes more sense in "eh". Thanks, David
