Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD

[Timur Tabi <timur@freescale.com>]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Oct 5 2007 13:27, Timur Tabi wrote:
>> What's the difference between __LITTLE_ENDIAN and __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD? Can
>> someone give me an example when __BIG_ENDIAN and __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD would
>> both be defined simultaneously?
> 
> standard x86:
> ---LSB-- ---2SB-- ---3SB-- ---MSB-- [bytes] LITTLE_ENDIAN
> M765432L M765432L M765432L M765432L  [bits] ?_BITFIELD
> 
> (Not sure what bitfield type, but I'd guess BIG_ENDIAN_BITFIELD)

Are you sure?  I would think that all machines would have the same byte and 
bit endian, otherwise you'd never be able to put a 16-bit value into a shift 
register.  Your bits will be shifted out like this:

<-- 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 00 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08

So I think x86 is:

---LSB-- ---2SB-- ---3SB-- ---MSB-- [bytes] LITTLE_ENDIAN
L234567M L234567M L234567M L234567M  [bits] LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale