From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77749DDE20 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:51:16 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 1/2] fb: add support for foreign endianness From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu In-Reply-To: <28238.1203468428@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> References: <20080205154432.GA8749@localhost.localdomain> <20080214224942.a0cb6218.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080215164542.GB16810@localhost.localdomain> <20080218081847.e9e65f2f.krzysztof.h1@poczta.fm> <19805.1203355811@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <47BA162C.5000807@anagramm.de> <1203381353.6740.59.camel@pasglop> <47BABD3A.7010102@anagramm.de> <20080219040530.7b1d115d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <28238.1203468428@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:50:04 +1100 Message-Id: <1203468604.7273.7.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, adaplas@gmail.com, Krzysztof Helt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Geert Uytterhoeven , Andrew Morton Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 19:47 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:05:30 PST, Andrew Morton said: > > On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:27:54 +0100 Clemens Koller > wrote: > > > That's not an issue in my case. The SM50x can be connected to > > > either an PCI or some Local/CPU-whateverbus IF. > > > I.e. on the MPC85xx PowerPC, PCI and LocalBus are separate bussses. > > > If the sm501 is attached to the MPC85xx' PCI like any other video card, > > > the PCI config-space is can be accessed as usual, whereas the framebuffer > > > memory area is byte-swapped compared to other common video cards. > > > Anyway, my head is now officially spinning. Did anyone actually have a > > reason why we shouldn't proceed with Anton's patch? > > Clemens answered my question regarding the real-life existence of hardware > that would benefit. I'd say if Anton's patch works on Clemens' hardware and > otherwise passes review, we should proceed... No objection here neither. Ben.