From: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: C++: Letting compiler know asm block can call function that can throw?
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 07:05:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F7409B9.2010407@redhat.com> (raw)
Hi all,
In LibreOffice's ever-beloved low-level code to synthesize calls to C++
virtual functions, I'm having the following problem (on Linux x86_64).
The function callVirtualMethod at
<http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/tree/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc3_linux_x86-64/uno2cpp.cxx?id=571876c1234ae55aab0198c7e2caf9049fcd230e#n61>
effectively does the following:
First, call dummy_can_throw_anything that can potentially throw (see
below for why that's there). Second, in an asm block, call some virtual
function (that can potentially throw). Third, call x86_64::fill_struct
that can potentially throw (it doesn't, but nobody bothered to annotate
it as "throw ()").
Now, at least GCC 4.7.0 with -O0 produces a .gcc_except_table section
for callVirtualMethod, with two call-site table entries each spanning
the first (dummy_can_throw_anything) and third (x86_64::fill_struct)
calls, resp., but none spanning the second (asm block) call. These
entries are effectively nop, simply calling back into _Unwind_Resume,
and compiling at higher optimization levels leaves them out anyway
(leading to callVirtualMethod having no corresponding .gcc_except_table
section).
The problem is that if the virtual function called through the asm block
throws an exception, that then immediately leads to std::terminate. My
understanding is that because the ip is at the call instruction in the
asm block that is between the two call-site table entries, the unwind
machinery thinks this cannot happen and bails out. (When compiled -O2,
the code happens to work fine, as there is no .gcc_except_table section
for this frame at all, so unwinding simply passes through it without
calling the personality function.)
Making sure that there are no calls to (compiler-visible) functions that
can throw within callVirtualMethod would happen to make the code also
work with -O0. But that would remain a fragile solution.
Is there a way to let the compiler know that the asm block potentially
calls functions that can throw? So that it could emit correct code,
regardless of whether callVirtualMethod happens to have a corresponding
.gcc_except_table section or not.
(The call to dummy_can_throw_anything, copied from the corresponding
older code for 32-bit x86, is there for the following reason: At least
with some compiler version and some optimization level, on x86 it was
discovered that the compiler did not emit the .eh_frame data necessary
for unwinding to successfully pass through this frame at all. As the
corresponding x86 code does not have a call to x86_64::fill_struct, the
compiler apparently considered callVirtualMethod a leaf function and
optimized accordingly. The dummy_can_throw_anything hack happened to
make it do the right thing again, but again this is a fragile solution,
anyway, that could be replaced with something robust if there were a way
to annotate the asm block as "calls functions that can throw.")
Stephan
next reply other threads:[~2012-03-29 7:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-29 7:05 Stephan Bergmann [this message]
2012-03-29 7:44 ` Jakub Jelinek
2012-03-29 8:48 ` Stephan Bergmann
2012-03-29 9:16 ` Richard Guenther
2012-03-29 12:51 ` Stephan Bergmann
2012-03-29 13:59 ` Michael Matz
2012-03-29 14:12 ` Andrew Haley
2012-03-29 15:10 ` Stephan Bergmann
2012-03-29 15:43 ` Michael Matz
2012-03-29 20:38 ` Eric Botcazou
2012-03-30 8:23 ` Richard Guenther
2012-03-29 16:14 ` Richard Henderson
2012-03-29 17:16 ` Jan Hubicka
2012-03-29 18:34 ` Richard Henderson
2012-03-30 8:19 ` Richard Guenther
2012-03-30 12:21 ` Jan Hubicka
2012-03-30 12:23 ` Richard Guenther
2012-03-30 15:46 ` Jan Hubicka
2012-04-02 14:08 ` Michael Matz
2012-04-02 14:17 ` Jakub Jelinek
2012-04-02 16:04 ` Michael Matz
2012-04-16 20:01 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F7409B9.2010407@redhat.com \
--to=sbergman@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).