Re: [PATCH] [RFC] #define __BYTE_ORDER

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 19:21, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:10:55 +0100
> Joakim Tjernlund <Joakim.Tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Linux does not define __BYTE_ORDER in its endian header files
>> which makes some header files bend backwards to get at the
>> current endian. Lets #define __BYTE_ORDER in big_endian.h/litte_endian.h
>> to make it easier for header files that are used in user space too.
>
> I don't get it. ÂWhy not nuke __BYTE_ORDER altogether and do `#ifdef
> __LITTLE_ENDIAN' and `#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN' everywhere?

Because in userspace the convention is that
  1. _both_ __LITTLE_ENDIAN and __BIG_ENDIAN are defined,
  2. you have to test for e.g. __BYTE_ORDER == __BIG_ENDIAN.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/