http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47005
--- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-05 16:55:57 UTC --- > Regarding the ten "stack-check" tests as I can them (c5210[3x,4x,4y], > cb1010[a,c,d], null_deref[1,2], stack-check[1,2]), I now understand that > it is expected that these tests pass on SJLJ targets. null_deref[1,2] are not really about stack checking, but I get the point. > Are these true passes meaning SJLJ targets are fully capable of handling > stack overflow and segfaults? Or are these results just false positives? Stack checking per se is orthogonal to ZCX vs SJLJ. What isn't orthogonal is the handling of segfaults (hence the connection to stack checking done with probes): SJLJ handles segfaults out of the box whereas ZCX needs MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT. So, yes, the aforementioned 10 special tests are expected to pass on SJLJ targets out of the box, i.e. without additional target-specific support.
