Andreas Schwab wrote:
The bit mapping on your device is strictly internal to the device and has nothing to do with bit order on the C level.
Then I don't understand that point of defining __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD. What does it mean for a C-level bitfield ordering to be little-endian if the processor is BIG_ENDIAN?
-- Timur Tabi Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- From: Andreas Schwab <[email protected]>
- Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- From: "linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" <[email protected]>
- Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- References:
- __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- From: Timur Tabi <[email protected]>
- Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
- Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- From: Timur Tabi <[email protected]>
- Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
- Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- From: Timur Tabi <[email protected]>
- Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- From: Andreas Schwab <[email protected]>
- __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- Prev by Date: Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Version 3 (2.6.23-rc8) Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel
- Previous by thread: Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- Next by thread: Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- Index(es):
 |