Re: [9fans] 8c question

[Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 133 bytes --]

sorry, i hadn't properly understood the context in which those
declarations were used.  i'll look at them again with that in mind.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2996 bytes --]

From: Tim Newsham <newsham@lava.net>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] 8c question
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:31:00 -1000 (HST)
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.4.61.0507071729150.8592@malasada.lava.net>

> i don't understand.  if it's in the portability interface,
> you say what arch_vcpu_info_t is, so why not
> typedef int arch_vcpu_info_t;
> and be done with it.  i don't see why it must be a struct
> in that context.

Typedefing it to an int would be fine, except then it will
be four bytes larger in Plan9 than it is in the Xen host.
Since this is a shared data structure, bad things will happen.

I think I might be able to get them to set it to some fixed
length size and just waste some space.  Its just a matter of
me getting time to create a patch and test it and submit it.

Tim Newsham
http://www.lava.net/~newsham/