linux-kernel - Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:07:30 -0500
From:	Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com>
To:	Andreas Schwab <schwab@...e.de>
CC:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD

Andreas Schwab wrote:

> The bit mapping on your device is strictly internal to the device and
> has nothing to do with bit order on the C level.

Then I don't understand that point of defining __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD.  What 
does it mean for a C-level bitfield ordering to be little-endian if the 
processor is BIG_ENDIAN?

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale
-
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/