On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 17:18 -0600, Grant Grundler wrote:
quoted text
> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 02:23:37PM -0700, Harvey Harrison wrote:
> ...
> > > Should this only be defined if BITS_PER_LONG is <=32  ?
> > 
> > The new byteorder headers only uses this if no __arch_swab64 is defined.
> > 
> > Further down in the parisc version, an __arch_swab64 is defined in the
> > BITS_PER_LONG >=32 case, making this moot.
> 
> Ok.
> 
> ...
> > Other than the endianness, any other concerns?
> 
> Have you had a chance to test this?

le-only personally (X86-32).

quoted text
> Or can you point me at another big endian arch that has similar 
> use of header files that has been successfully tested?

AVR32 got a maintainer ack, I'm assuming that was tested.  It's not
functionally any different than the existing code really, other
than allowing compile-time folding in the cpu_to_{endian} helpers.

Mips was also acked, but that can be little or big endian.

quoted text
> 
> I can arrange for access to parisc HW if you have time/interest
> in testing this yourself.

Sure, drop me a note.

Harvey

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/