| To: | Jun Sun <jsun@mvista.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Endianness... |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com> |
| Date: | Fri, 4 May 2001 09:46:34 -0300 |
| Cc: | nick@snowman.net, Matthew Dharm <mdharm@momenco.com>, Linux-MIPS <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com> |
| In-reply-to: | <3AF0724B.D74D9AF9@mvista.com>; from jsun@mvista.com on Wed, May 02, 2001 at 01:47:07PM -0700 |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.21.0105021603030.22170-100000@ns> <3AF0724B.D74D9AF9@mvista.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 01:47:07PM -0700, Jun Sun wrote: > BE is better known perhaps because all SGI workstations are BE. Generally I > found networking systems tend to use BE while consumer electronic devices tend > to use LE (which means there are probably more MIPS CPUs running in LE.) > > So far I have not found much difference in terms of endianess, although > occassionaly you have to IO swap in drivers for BE machine. The difference is mostly of religious nature even though I've been told that various embedded apps can show noticable performance difference due to byteswapping. In general I prefer big endian because it tends to trigger certain bugs in software more than little endian, such as accessing a memory object with different sizes. Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Patch tx3912 - inb/outb definition, Florian Lohoff |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: NFS -13 error, Guido Guenther |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Endianness..., Jun Sun |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Endianness..., Kevin D. Kissell |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |