On 5 January 2015 at 13:47, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote: > 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?
Yep; I've put it into target-arm.next. -- PMM
