[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMo8Bf+m0mqnrpC=b+3sGq0iMfqUj2uVtQxtLU6+5pNc_4fWNw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 15:52:14 -0700
From: Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>
To: Babu Moger <babu.moger@...cle.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
sparclinux <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: CPU_BIG_ENDIAN in generic code (was: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7]
arch/sparc: Define config parameter CPU_BIG_ENDIAN)
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Babu Moger <babu.moger@...cle.com> wrote:
> On 5/25/2017 5:27 PM, Max Filippov wrote:
>> Xtensa may have either endianness and for xtensa we define
>> CONFIG_CPU_BIG_ENDIAN or CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN
>> in the arch/xtensa/Makefile based on the value of the compiler builtin
>> macro.
>
> Hmm.. That means defining CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN based on "def_bool
> !CPU_BIG_ENDIAN" will
> be a problem for Xtensa because menuconfig does not have the knowledge of
> compiler builtin macro.
> Is that correct?
I think so. OTOH outside the arch/ CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN is only used in
two Kconfig files:
drivers/crypto/nx/Kconfig
drivers/isdn/hisax/Kconfig
both of which are irrelevant for xtensa.
--
Thanks.
-- Max
Powered by blists - more mailing lists