On 2 January 2015 at 19:21, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote:
> I think the union type may have been a mistake to
> begin with, because it introduces endianness dependencies that don't
> actually exist in the code. It probably would have been cleaner if I
> had defined the relation between VFP D-regs, words and bytes in terms
> of shifts and masks instead.

Mmm, I think in retrospect this is right. Still, this patch does
cause the kernel's self-tests on boot on a BE ppc64 host to pass,
and looking through the code we haven't missed any accesses to
.bytes or .words, so it looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>

-- PMM

Reply via email to