From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mitch Bradley Subject: Re: Of the device tree binary format endianness on little-endian platform Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 07:10:08 -1000 Message-ID: <499C40F0.5020800@firmworks.com> References: <1234975585.17001.131.camel@pc-laurentg.intra.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1234975585.17001.131.camel-AlTa8cHOufjkPJRI6LV1/EZjUo8kaGiB@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org To: Laurent Gregoire Cc: devicetree-discuss-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > > Hi, > > We are currently investigating the use of a flattened device-tree for > configuring some boot parameters on a new ARM platform. ARM being > little-endian, the first question that arise is whether we should keep > the .dtb binary format itself big-endian or switch to little-endian? > Apparently the format does not specify endianness specifically, and I > did not found any relevant information concerning this. > I can't speak for flattened device trees specifically, but IEEE1275 (Open Firmware) specifies that integers are encoded in property values in big-endian byte order. The model is serialization/deserialization, rather than overlaying a C struct on top of the data. > Perhaps this has already been decided somewhere on the roadmap of using > device-tree outside the PPC-world. > > Any comments welcomed, > > Laurent GREGOIRE > Embedded Software Engineering | TomTom | www.tomtom.com > > _______________________________________________ > devicetree-discuss mailing list > devicetree-discuss-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org > https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/devicetree-discuss >