Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Given that we have already established littleendian byte order, it's the
>> same thing.
>>
>
> Well, not quite; mentioning the string form first creates an ambiguity.
> I'd express as something like: ``The magic number is 0x53726448
> (implicitly, stored little-endian), which breaks down to the characters
> "HdrS".''
It does not create any ambiguity whatsoever. The two are equivalent
forms, and either is authoritative.
>>>> +
>>>> +Field name: version
>>>> +Type: read
>>>> +Offset/size: 0x206/2
>>>> +Protocol: 2.00+
>>>> +
>>>> + Contains the boot protocol version, e.g. 0x0204 for version 2.04.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> So the version is in BCD?
>>>
>> Valid objection. It probably should be considered as (major, minor)
>> bytes, but we haven't had any releases where it hasn't also been valid
>> BCD. I would prefer separate bytes myself, so 2.10 = 0x20a instead of
>> 2.10 = 0x210.
>
> OK. So is the major or minor at the lower address?
Minor. Littleendian.
> 0x00 or \0-terminated is idiomatic and unambigous. Not a big deal
> either way.
Null-terminated is idiomatic and unambiguous.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
