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.

Reply via email to