On 5 January 2015 at 12:34, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > 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> >
OK, good, thanks for testing. I propose we leave the patch as-is then. Are you ok to add the tags and merge it? Cheers, Ard.
