On Mon, 2014-01-27 at 23:49 +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > > Er, what? If we make the array be guest's current order > then by definition userspace has to look at the guest's > current endianness. I agree that would be bad. Either > of the two current proposals (host kernel order; guest > CPU's native/natural/default-byte-order) avoid it, though.
No, this has nothing to do with the guest endianness, and all to do about the (hopefully) byte-address invariant bus we have on the processor. Anyway, the existing crap is ABI so I suspect we have to stick with it, just maybe document it better. Ben.
