From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932494Ab0JAMF2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2010 08:05:28 -0400 Received: from hermes.mlbassoc.com ([64.234.241.98]:60743 "EHLO mail.chez-thomas.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932182Ab0JAMF0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2010 08:05:26 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 584 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 08:05:26 EDT Message-ID: <4CA5CC3C.6020006@mlbassoc.com> Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 05:55:40 -0600 From: Gary Thomas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100430 Fedora/3.0.4-2.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Josh Boyer CC: Kumar Gala , paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Ian Munsie , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Introduce support for little endian PowerPC References: <1285916771-18033-1-git-send-email-imunsie@au1.ibm.com> <2C5357FA-F87F-457E-B5C1-0DCC5A842DE7@kernel.crashing.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/01/2010 05:30 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Kumar Gala wrote: >> >> On Oct 1, 2010, at 2:05 AM, Ian Munsie wrote: >> >>> Some PowerPC processors can be run in either big or little endian modes, some >>> others can map selected pages of memory as little endian, which allows the same >>> thing. Until now we have only supported the default big endian mode in Linux. >>> This patch set introduces little endian support for the 44x family of PowerPC >>> processors. >> >> From a community aspect is anyone actually going to use this? Is this going to be the equivalent of voyager on x86? I've got nothing against some of the endian clean ups this introduces. However the changes to misc_32.S are a bit ugly from a readability point of view. Just seems like this is likely to bit-rot pretty quickly. > > I'm with Kumar on this one. Why would we want to support this? I > can't say I would be very willing to help anyone run in LE mode, let > alone have it randomly selectable. Indeed, I thought we had killed that Windows-NT dog ~15 years ago :-) -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates | Embedded world ------------------------------------------------------------