On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 10:39:09AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 7 October 2016 at 00:55, David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote: > > It is an improvement. But I still think if we're relying on the > > ill-defined "target endianness" we're already doing something wrong. > > Target endianness is not ill-defined. It's a clear and constant > property of the bus the CPU is plugged into.
It's certainly not clear to me. How are you defining it?
Preferably in terms of visible effects, rather than something that
requires snooping into pieces of hardware that aren't actually
modelled in qemu...
> It is a bit weird
> to rely on it in the test code, which is why only the virtio
> tests currently use qtest_big_endian().
>
> thanks
> -- PMM
>
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
