From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50374) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eHC2z-00040A-85 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 12:09:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eHC2y-00085R-Gq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 12:09:21 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42610) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eHC2y-00084v-Bg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 12:09:20 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EBFDC054C44 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 17:09:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 19:09:18 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20171121190647-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <1510834622-28800-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com> <20171120175522.76bf71c3@redhat.com> <20171120223048-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20171121142639.3e6d2e79@redhat.com> <20171121164254-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20171121165809.1ec4362a@redhat.com> <20171121180202-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20171121172236.618c8e08@redhat.com> <20171121182432-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20171121175812.6f922e2e@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171121175812.6f922e2e@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] tests/bios-tables-test: Fix endianess problems when passing data to iasl List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Mammedov Cc: Thomas Huth , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 05:58:12PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote: > anyways, if you prefer having mixed endianness here, I won't mind much, > as impact of test case is much smaller so we'll see down the road > if it became any better. I agree here. > (as far as we continue going in direction > of using host byteorder within main qemu acpi code, which we were > doing by gradually converting acpi structures to build_append_foo API) So APIs are absolutely a good alternative. If we get rid of packed structures in main qemu code, we could convert tests to whatever makes sense for tests. -- MST