From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06C56ADE3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 20 May 2016 14:18:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from was59-1-82-226-113-214.fbx.proxad.net ([82.226.113.214]
 helo=[192.168.0.10])
 by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
 (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <olivier.matz@6wind.com>)
 id 1b3jQ1-0002Lo-Vy; Fri, 20 May 2016 14:20:42 +0200
To: Chao Zhu <chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, dev@dpdk.org
References: <1463143859-3105-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <1463479192-2488-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <1463479192-2488-7-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <000301d1b1ae$cebf1470$6c3d3d50$@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <573EFEEF.4040800@6wind.com>
Cc: david.marchand@6wind.com, yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com, huawei.xie@intel.com
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <573F0093.6030501@6wind.com>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 14:18:27 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Icedove/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <573EFEEF.4040800@6wind.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gbk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/7] virtio: fix pci accesses for ppc64 in
	legacy mode
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 12:18:37 -0000



On 05/20/2016 02:11 PM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Maybe I could replace in the patch:
>   #ifdef RTE_ARCH_PPC_64
> By something like :
>   #if defined(RTE_ARCH_PPC_64) && (RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_LITTLE_ENDIAN)

Hmm it's probably useless since we already do a
rte_be_to_cpu_*(), so it should do nothing on BE
targets.