> Was this considered significantly more complex because of the need to > discriminate between native and reverse order? Or do you expect similar > complexity even if this is not required (see my comment below)?
The former. > I don't. The idea is to reverse scalar storage order for the whole > userspace process and then add byte swapping to the Linux kernel when > accessing userspace memory. This keeps userspace memory consistent > with regards to endianness, which should lead to high compatibility > with big-endian applications. Userspace memory access from the kernel > always uses a small set of helper functions, which should make it > easier to insert byte swapping at appropriate places. Well, if your userspace is entirely in reverse order, then of course things are totally different and I suspect that you'll pay the price in term of run time performance. This is not what the attribute was designed for, although we added the -fsso-struct switch at some point. -- Eric Botcazou
