On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:18:14PM -0800, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> Why are we worrying about byte order here at all? I'd think we could
> just print t->dw0 directly with %08x.
Right, my only concern is since this is user-facing, someone/something
might depend on its format/byte order. But since no
> I think we should expect AER to be used on big-endian machines. I'm
> pretty sure it's used on Itanium in big-endian mode.
Itanium can run in either big or little endian mode - but Linux uses little
endian:
arch/ia64/include/uapi/asm/byteorder.h:#include
-Tony
[+cc Tony]
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:50:46PM +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>> Commit fab4c256a58b ("PCI/AER: Add a TLP header print helper")
>> introduced the helper function __print_tlp_header, but contrary to the
>> intention, the
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:50:46PM +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> Commit fab4c256a58b ("PCI/AER: Add a TLP header print helper")
> introduced the helper function __print_tlp_header, but contrary to the
> intention, the behaviour did change: Since we're taking the address of
Whoops, good catch.
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:50:46PM +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
Commit fab4c256a58b (PCI/AER: Add a TLP header print helper)
introduced the helper function __print_tlp_header, but contrary to the
intention, the behaviour did change: Since we're taking the address of
Whoops, good catch.
the
[+cc Tony]
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de wrote:
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:50:46PM +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
Commit fab4c256a58b (PCI/AER: Add a TLP header print helper)
introduced the helper function __print_tlp_header, but contrary to the
intention, the
I think we should expect AER to be used on big-endian machines. I'm
pretty sure it's used on Itanium in big-endian mode.
Itanium can run in either big or little endian mode - but Linux uses little
endian:
arch/ia64/include/uapi/asm/byteorder.h:#include
linux/byteorder/little_endian.h
-Tony
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:18:14PM -0800, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
Why are we worrying about byte order here at all? I'd think we could
just print t-dw0 directly with %08x.
Right, my only concern is since this is user-facing, someone/something
might depend on its format/byte order. But since no
Commit fab4c256a58b ("PCI/AER: Add a TLP header print helper")
introduced the helper function __print_tlp_header, but contrary to the
intention, the behaviour did change: Since we're taking the address of
the parameter t, the first 4 or 8 bytes printed will be the value of
the pointer t itself,
Commit fab4c256a58b (PCI/AER: Add a TLP header print helper)
introduced the helper function __print_tlp_header, but contrary to the
intention, the behaviour did change: Since we're taking the address of
the parameter t, the first 4 or 8 bytes printed will be the value of
the pointer t itself, and
10 matches
Mail list logo
