Re: i386 and x86-64 bitops function prototypes differ

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Friday, January 26, 2007 - 10:49 am

Stephane Eranian wrote:

Arguably void * is the right thing for a littleendian architecture.  For 
bigendian architectures it unfortunately matters what the chunk size is, 
regardless of if the chunks are numbered in bigendian (reverse) or 
littleendian (forward) order.

	-hpa
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
i386 and x86-64 bitops function prototypes differ, Stephane Eranian, (Fri Jan 26, 7:35 am)
Re: i386 and x86-64 bitops function prototypes differ, H. Peter Anvin, (Fri Jan 26, 10:49 am)
Re: i386 and x86-64 bitops function prototypes differ, Stephane Eranian, (Thu Feb 1, 2:15 am)
Re: i386 and x86-64 bitops function prototypes differ, Andrew Morton, (Thu Feb 1, 3:55 pm)
Re: i386 and x86-64 bitops function prototypes differ, Stephane Eranian, (Thu Feb 1, 4:27 pm)