| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 12:48:51 +0400 From: "Alexey Zaytsev" <alexey.zaytsev@...il.com> To: "Tomasz Chmielewski" <mangoo@...g.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org, "Michael Jones" <mlj28@....ac.uk>, "Krzysztof Halasa" <khc@...waw.pl> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Intel IXP4xx network drivers v.2 - Ethernet and HSS On 5/8/07, Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...g.org> wrote: > Michael Jones wrote: > > >> +#ifndef __ARMEB__ > >> +#warning Little endian mode not supported > >> +#endif > > > > Personally I'm less fussed about WAN / LE support. Anyone with any > > sense will run ixp4xx boards doing such a specialised network > > operation as BE. Also, NSLU2-Linux can't test this functionality with > > our LE setup as we don't have this hardware on-board. You may just > > want to declare a depends on ARMEB in Kconfig (with or without OR > > (ARM || BROKEN) ) and have done with it - it's up to you. > > Christian Hohnstaedt's work did support LE though. > > Not all ixp4xx boards are by definition "doing such a specialised > network operation". > I was always curious, why do people want to run ixp4xx in LE mode? What are the benefits that overweight the obvious performance degradation? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists