On 10/06/2025 16:33, Tom Rini wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 04:18:50PM +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
Test for big-endian either via __RISCVEB__ which migth be
rather old, or check the BYTE_ORDER if the compiler defines
it (which should be any modern gcc like v12)
Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <[email protected]>
---
arch/riscv/include/asm/byteorder.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/byteorder.h
b/arch/riscv/include/asm/byteorder.h
index d26ac5688fa..3140c1f585e 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/byteorder.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/byteorder.h
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
# define __SWAB_64_THRU_32__
#endif
-#ifdef __RISCVEB__
+#if defined(__RISCVEB__) || (defined(__BYTE_ORDER__) && __BYTE_ORDER__ ==
__ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__)
#include <linux/byteorder/big_endian.h>
#else
#include <linux/byteorder/little_endian.h>
What's this look like in the linux kernel? We should likely just mirror
that.
We're still looking at the kernel too.
I think we could just drop the __RISCVEB__ test, I don't think anything
is defining it.
--
Ben Dooks http://www.codethink.co.uk/
Senior Engineer Codethink - Providing Genius
https://www.codethink.co.uk/privacy.html
