[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1285972082.2463.250.camel@pasglop>
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 08:28:02 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Cc: Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, paulus@...ba.org,
Ian Munsie <imunsie@....ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Introduce support for little endian PowerPC
On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 17:03 -0500, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > Maybe. Most of it doesn't seem to be that bit-rottable.
> >
> > The changes to the asm stuff in misc_32.S for example are functions we
> > never ever touch once written (libgcc replacements) so I don't see them
> > rotting more with LE support than they did with BE :-)
>
> Does KVM/qemu support running LE guest on BE host? That'd help keeping
> the bitrot lower. :)
Not yet I suppose :-) But then, I'm not sure it would make a big
difference, if you have a 440 board in the first place, you can boot
either LE or BE, no need for a special FW or anything.
What we've done is basically keep the zImage wrapper BE (for now at
least), and have it trampoline to LE when executing the actual kernel
(using a cuImage, of course a device-tree enabled u-Boot would probably
need something akin to a proper ePAPR zImage to do that but that's
reasonably easy to do nowadays).
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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