From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [microblaze-uclinux] Re: [PATCH v2 22/22] bitops: remove minix bitops from asm/bitops.h Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 15:31:35 +0200 Message-ID: <201010251531.35485.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1287672077-5797-1-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com> <4CC4C1B4.9090907@monstr.eu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4CC4C1B4.9090907@monstr.eu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: monstr@monstr.eu Cc: microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Monday 25 October 2010, Michal Simek wrote: > > If upcomming microblade little-endian mode will use little-endian > > bitmaps for minixfs, microblade can continue to select > > CONFIG_MINIX_FS_NATIVE_ENDIAN and you don't need to change it. > > > > But if it will use big-endian bitmaps, it may need some extra work > > to support it. Becuase there is no little-endian architecture > > which uses bit-endian bitmaps for minixfs. > > As I wrote I don't know anybody who wants to use minixfs that's why we don't > need to do anything with it. I can test it but it has no high priority. I think it needs to be set up in a way that new architectures (and those that never cared about minixfs) automatically get a reasonable default and should not need to set anything. I don't see a reason why little-endian microblaze should use big-endian bitops in minixfs, since that file system layout would also be incompatible with every other one. CONFIG_MINIX_FS_NATIVE_ENDIAN seems reasonable for both big- and little- endian microblaze, but new architectures should just keep the default little-endian bitops IMHO. I also don't see a reason for testing. Any new users on microblaze or future architectures would use a modern file system anyway. Arnd