Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 22:28:12 +0100 From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: alpha@freebsd.org Subject: Re: structure padding Message-ID: <xzpoete2kr7.fsf@dwp.des.no> In-Reply-To: <200401081542.49500.jhb@FreeBSD.org> (John Baldwin's message of "Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:42:49 -0500") References: <xzpoete42r1.fsf@dwp.des.no> <200401081542.49500.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> Maybe:
>
> struct eproc {
> union {
> pid_t e_sid;
> long e_oldspare;
> }
> long e_spare[1];
>
> (I think gcc supports anonymous unions like that.)
I thought about that, but it's butt-ugly...
Does anyone have an Alpha running 4.x that I could test this on?
> In 6.0 you could remove the union hack and change the ABI, assuming that you
> want to put this in 5.x as well.
5.x has a completely different struct kinfo_proc which already
contains the session id.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpoete2kr7.fsf>