Re: [parisc-linux] Re: NPTL for hppa-linux is not backwards compatible with Linuxthreads.

On 2/23/07, Roland McGrath <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In the new structure we have shifted everything up because __lock is
> > now an integer, instead of a _pthread_fastlock with a 4 word lock
> > structure. Should I add padding after "__lock" e.g. int pad[3]?
>
> Yes, you must dedicate those words to compatibility only.

Unfortunatly, due to alignment the NPTL pthread_cond_t grows larger
than the Linuxthreads version when I add the padding. This is the only
structure the grows larger in size than before. Is there any way I can
avoid adding the padding?

Does this scenario exist:
__lock = 1, __futex = 1, __total_seq = 1, __wakeup_seq = 1, everything
else zero?

If it doesn't then I *could* detect the old style lock initialization
without adding the padding.

Cheers,
Carlos.