On 31/03/2025 8:42 am, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 28.03.2025 14:44, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> There is a singular user. It's unlikely we'll gain a big-endian build of >> Xen, >> but it's far more unlikely that bitfields will differ from main endianness. > Just one point: While endian-ness in general is dictated by hardware, endian- > ness of bitfields is entirely a psABI thing, aiui. Hence tying both together > (beyond the latter defaulting to the former) doesn't seem quite appropriate > to me. > >> I'm tempted to simply drop the logic in maptrack_node. If any big-endian >> build of Xen came along, that's probably the least of it's worries. > As long as it's not obviously broken, I'd prefer to keep such. While it may > not be a primary worry, it's still one less of all the worries then.
Given the way patch 3 has ended up, this is easier to keep than in earlier revisions. Still, I think it's of very dubious utility. ~Andrew
