From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36207)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rusty@ozlabs.org>) id 1Wiado-0002lb-1I
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 May 2014 22:34:32 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rusty@ozlabs.org>) id 1Wiadi-0008L8-2l
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 May 2014 22:34:27 -0400
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <536A1EFC.4060405@suse.de>
References: <20140505074816.25523.71374.stgit@bahia.local>
	<20140505080520.25523.44406.stgit@bahia.local>
	<CAFEAcA_uHdSPt73DcHBOZu2zGdoKFq5d19gC7K6V=-Z6r9RYSg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140507101443.146fc26d@bahia.local> <5369F864.7040406@suse.de>
	<CAFEAcA_1+EiHiRgvQvGPyVbvd=TBqLLYo4quOvLum2GGM5-EZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<8EFC6697-F364-41B3-9097-ED5529292105@suse.de>
	<20140507121924.3503e110@bahia.local> <536A1EFC.4060405@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 11:06:19 +0930
Message-ID: <87ha51njak.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 3/4] target-ppc: ppc can be either endian
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, Greg Kurz <gkurz@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "qemu-ppc@nongnu.org" <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>, "bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rbe?= =?utf-8?Q?r?= <afaerber@suse.de>

Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> writes:
> On 05/07/2014 12:19 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> The uglyness about the current_cpu bit is that devices are usually not 
> supposed to know about the cpu accesses come from usually. But then 
> again devices shouldn't know about the endianness of a cpu either so I 
> guess it's ok to breach layers here.
>
> Rusty, do you have strong feelings either way?

My only strong feeling is that qemu is horrible to get patches into.

At this point, I really don't care :(

Rusty.