Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 23:21:08 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Jake Burkholder <jake@locore.ca> Cc: Thomas Moestl <tmoestl@gmx.net>, <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: adding more endian conversion and bus space functions Message-ID: <20020113230455.K709-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20020112115513.L39321@locore.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Jake Burkholder wrote: > Apparently, On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 10:00:45PM +1100, > Bruce Evans said words to the effect of; > > Mike Barcroft is doing this. IIRC, it doesn't have <sys/endian.h>, since > > the ntohl() family is declared in <net/arpa.h> according to POSIX, so > > <sys/endian.h> would be neither standard no useful. > > It is useful to if we don't have to duplicate C implementations > of byte swapping functions 5 times. The current ones are in libc. Mike moved most of the common parts to <sys/param.h> and/or <sys/types.h>. > > I think the bus > > space headers should not depend on any endianness support in other > > headers except <machine/endian.h> defining _[_]BYTE_ORDER. > > Why? I disagree. Because they are specialized for bus accesses and need to support many more types of accesses than <machine/endian.h>. They can easily duplicate the small part of ntohl(), etc., that they need (if they need it), like the i386 one already does for most of the i/o instructions in the i386 cpufunc.h. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020113230455.K709-100000>