From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: cramfs in big endian
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 15:13:22 +0000
Message-ID: <20071110151322.GA21768@infradead.org>
References: <200711062216.27156.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> <4731C308.8090008@slax.org> <200711072151.49032.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> <20071107224936.GA8517@infradead.org> <47350345.4010108@zytor.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Andi Drebes <lists-receive@programmierforen.de>,
	Tomas M <tomas@slax.org>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:49744 "EHLO
	pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751391AbXKJPNp (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 10 Nov 2007 10:13:45 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <47350345.4010108@zytor.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 05:03:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Endian-independent code is slower than wrong-endian code, because of the 
> necessary conditionals.  Thus, you DO NOT WANT this(*).

I'd prefer not to have it either.  But a someone (pinhead) was smart
enough not to define an endianess for cramfs from the beginning we're
stuck with it.