Re: ibmvtpm byteswapping inconsistency

[Michael Ellerman]

Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 01/29/2017 08:32 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>> Byte  |   0   |   1   |   2   |   3   |   4   |   5   |   6   |   7
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Word0 | Valid | Type  |     Length    |              Data
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Word1 |				Reserved
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> The following definition looks to match:
>>>
>>> struct ibmvtpm_crq {
>>>         u8 valid;
>>>         u8 msg;
>>>         __be16 len;
>>>         __be32 data;
>>>         __be64 reserved;
>>> } __attribute__((packed, aligned(8)));
>> 
>> Well it's a partial match.
>> 
>> Your layout above doesn't define which byte of Length or Data is the MSB
>> or LSB. So going by that we still don't know the endianness of either
>
> I should have been explicit that PAPR uses Big Endian bit and byte
> numbering throughout the spec unless otherwise noted.

OK. I didn't actually remember that so yeah good to be explicit.

cheers