GCC 4.1.1 for PowerPC generates a 162K executable for a
minimal program "int main() { return 0; }". GCC 3.4.1
generated a 7.2K executable. Mark Mitchell mentioned the
same problem for ARM and proposed a patch to remove the
reference to malloc in atexit
(http://sourceware.org/ml/newlib/2006/msg0
Michael Eager wrote:
> GCC 4.1.1 for PowerPC generates a 162K executable for a
> minimal program "int main() { return 0; }". GCC 3.4.1
> generated a 7.2K executable. Mark Mitchell mentioned the
> same problem for ARM and proposed a patch to remove the
> reference to malloc in atexit
> (http://so
Mark Mitchell wrote:
Michael Eager wrote:
GCC 4.1.1 for PowerPC generates a 162K executable for a
minimal program "int main() { return 0; }". GCC 3.4.1
generated a 7.2K executable. Mark Mitchell mentioned the
same problem for ARM and proposed a patch to remove the
reference to malloc in atexi
Michael Eager wrote:
> Preallocating space is a good thing, particularly if the size
> can be computed at compile time. It's a little bit more awkward
> if it has to be calculated at link time.
It's a bit awkward, but it's also one of the clever tricks ARM's
proprietary linker uses, and we shoul
Mark Mitchell wrote:
Generating __gxx_personality_v0 is suppressed with the -fno-exceptions
flag, but it would seem better if this symbol were only generated
when catch/throw was used. This happens in cxx_init_decl_processing(),
which is called before it's known whether or not EH is really neede
Michael Eager wrote:
> Mark Mitchell wrote:
>>> Generating __gxx_personality_v0 is suppressed with the -fno-exceptions
>>> flag, but it would seem better if this symbol were only generated
>>> when catch/throw was used. This happens in cxx_init_decl_processing(),
>>> which is called before it's kn
Mark Mitchell wrote:
Michael Eager wrote:
Why should the personality routine be included in all C++ programs?
Because all non-trivial, exceptions-enabled programs, may need to do
stack unwinding.
It would seem that the place to require the personality
routine would be in the routine which ca
On Sunday 12 November 2006 22:46, Michael Eager wrote:
> Mark Mitchell wrote:
> > Michael Eager wrote:
> >> Why should the personality routine be included in all C++ programs?
> >
> > Because all non-trivial, exceptions-enabled programs, may need to do
> > stack unwinding.
>
> It would seem that th
Michael Eager wrote:
> Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> Michael Eager wrote:
>>> Why should the personality routine be included in all C++ programs?
>>
>> Because all non-trivial, exceptions-enabled programs, may need to do
>> stack unwinding.
>
> It would seem that the place to require the personality
> r
Mark Mitchell wrote:
But, the way the ABI works requires a reference from each unit which may
cause unwinding. Even if you lose the personality routine, you will
still have the exception tables, which themselves are a significant
cost. If you don't want to pay for exceptions, you really have to
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 11:17:14PM +, Paul Brook wrote:
> The code being unwound through (ie. with frame data) needs to be able to
> say "I need routine X if __Unwind_Raise is used anywhere in this program".
> I'm not aware of any way of doing this, other than trying it and starting
> again i
On Monday 13 November 2006 00:53, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 11:17:14PM +, Paul Brook wrote:
> > The code being unwound through (ie. with frame data) needs to be able to
> > say "I need routine X if __Unwind_Raise is used anywhere in this
> > program". I'm not aware of a
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> If you try what Michael's been saying, you'll notice that trivial
> C++ files get the personality routine reference even if they don't
> have anything with a destructor which would need cleaning up. We ought
> to be able to emit (somewhat smaller) unwind information whi
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 01:03:10AM +, Paul Brook wrote:
> > C++ files get the personality routine reference even if they don't
> > have anything with a destructor which would need cleaning up. We ought
> > to be able to emit (somewhat smaller) unwind information which doesn't
> > reference the
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 05:11:39PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> > If you try what Michael's been saying, you'll notice that trivial
> > C++ files get the personality routine reference even if they don't
> > have anything with a destructor which would need cleaning up.
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 05:11:39PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>>
>>> If you try what Michael's been saying, you'll notice that trivial
>>> C++ files get the personality routine reference even if they don't
>>> have anything with a destructor w
> GCC 4.1.1 for PowerPC generates a 162K executable for a
> minimal program "int main() { return 0; }". GCC 3.4.1
> generated a 7.2K executable. Mark Mitchell mentioned the
> same problem for ARM and proposed a patch to remove the
> reference to malloc in atexit
> (http://sourceware.org/ml/newl
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 02:46:58PM -0800, Michael Eager wrote:
> It would seem that the place to require the personality
> routine would be in the routine which causes the stack
> unwinding, not in every C++ object file, whether needed
> or not.
Doesn't that otherwise very valid point of view brea
Olivier Galibert wrote:
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 02:46:58PM -0800, Michael Eager wrote:
It would seem that the place to require the personality
routine would be in the routine which causes the stack
unwinding, not in every C++ object file, whether needed
or not.
Doesn't that otherwise very vali
19 matches
Mail list logo
