Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/5] Xen: introduce Xen PV target

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 24 Jan 2014, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 24/01/2014 15:35, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> > > > (1) decide that the Xen ring buffers are little-endian even on
> > > big-endian
> > > > CPUs
> > > >
> > > > (2) communicate the endianness of the Xen ring buffers via Xenstore,
> > > just
> > > > like we do for sizeof(long), and let the guest use either endianness on
> > > any
> > > > architecture.
> > You still have to make a choice about what you think
> > TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN should be, and it's still going
> > to be wrong half the time and horribly confusing.
> > I just think this is completely the wrong solution to
> > the problem.
> 
> Theoretically the xenpv-softmmu machine shouldn't need any code that depends
> on TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN.
> 
> If we changed every #ifdef TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN to if(), we could compile it
> with "#define TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN abort()".

Right. All our PV protocols are little endian by definition.

Besides I don't know how to state this more clearly but there are no big
endian Xen guests. There have never been any big endian Xen guests.
There are no big endian Xen guests on the roadmap.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel