[ECOS] Again Big endian ARM HAL_WRITE_UINT8 problem

[ECOS] Again Big endian ARM HAL_WRITE_UINT8 problem

[Roland Caßebohm]

Hi,

there is still the problem, that the HAL_WRITE_UINT8() macro
on bigendian ARM hardware does not work.

In the following message is a solution suggested, which would
be good IMO.
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss/2002-07/msg00415.html

I don't know which platform have to use the macros for bigendian
like they are, maybe pid target? I uses the macro and can be set
to bigendian.

I would like to make a patch, but if I use a flag like 
HAL_IO_MACROS_ADDRESS_MUNGING a platform who needs the macros as
they are have to define the flag not to be broken.
Or should I define a flag like HAL_IO_MACROS_NO_ADDRESS_MUNGING
for platforms like snds which don't need the address munging?

Another discussion about this topic:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss/2002-07/msg00160.html

Regards,
Roland
-- 

___________________________________________________

VS Vision Systems GmbH, Industrial Image Processing
Dipl.-Ing. Roland Caßebohm
Aspelohe 27A, D-22848 Norderstedt, Germany
http://www.visionsystems.de
___________________________________________________


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Again Big endian ARM HAL_WRITE_UINT8 problem

[Andrew Lunn]

On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 06:27:58PM +0200, Roland Ca?ebohm wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> there is still the problem, that the HAL_WRITE_UINT8() macro
> on bigendian ARM hardware does not work.
> 
> In the following message is a solution suggested, which would
> be good IMO.
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss/2002-07/msg00415.html
> 
> I don't know which platform have to use the macros for bigendian
> like they are, maybe pid target? I uses the macro and can be set
> to bigendian.
> 
> I would like to make a patch, but if I use a flag like 
> HAL_IO_MACROS_ADDRESS_MUNGING a platform who needs the macros as
> they are have to define the flag not to be broken.
> Or should I define a flag like HAL_IO_MACROS_NO_ADDRESS_MUNGING
> for platforms like snds which don't need the address munging?

We always try to keep the default behavior. In this case you could
break a few targets without knowing it which is always bad.

I would use the flag HAL_IO_MACROS_NO_ADDRESS_MUNGING and it the HALs
you know need it.

    Andrew


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss