On Thu Sep 2 02:38:12 EDT 2010, [email protected] wrote: > OK, the problem with _tos on 9vx is making some sense. > > gcc and 8c disagree on the size of the Tos struct. It's declared the > same way in 9vx as in > Plan 9, but 8c thinks it is 56 bytes and gcc thinks it is 88. > > The reason is that 9vx is compiled on a 64-bit machine in this case, > so we are running 32-bit binaries on a 64-bit kernel, i.e. it is > heterogeneous. Amusing :-) > > Guess I'll try 9vx as a 32-bit binary and see what shakes.
since 56%4==0, can't you correct the size mismatch by using 32-bit types to prevent 64-bit 9vx from doubling the size? - erik
