From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Hollis <hollis-lists@austin.rr.com>
To: "Timothy A. Seufert" <tas@mindspring.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: another endianness issue...
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 13:33:27 -0500
Cc: Guillaume =?iso-8859-1?q?Laur=E8s?= <guillaume.laures@noos.fr>,
	"Leonard N. Zubkoff" <lnz@dandelion.com>
References: <3B2E747A.6090607@noos.fr> <3B34616F.2090403@noos.fr> <v04220800b75a8da0ed9d@[10.0.0.42]>
In-Reply-To: <v04220800b75a8da0ed9d@[10.0.0.42]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <01062313332701.00569@silence.internal>
Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org
List-Id: <linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org>


On Saturday 23 June 2001 01:19, Timothy A. Seufert wrote:
>
> Bitfields are not a good way to describe hardware registers.

Why is that? Are there generally bitfield problems other than this one?

-Hollis

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/