From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Brandt Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 15:02:55 +0000 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] cramfs: change to new site location In-Reply-To: References: <20180213195449.51516-1-chris.brandt@renesas.com> <20180213195449.51516-2-chris.brandt@renesas.com> <20180213211453.519b65eb@windsurf.lan> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello Matthew, On Thursday, April 05, 2018, Matthew Weber wrote: > > I don't have any big endian systems, so I can't test it either. > > > > But, Nicolas said that if someone is willing to test it and sign off on > > it, he would add it to his repository. > > Hi, I ran into a bug in the existing buildroot cramfs fs support for > big endian and Thomas pointed me at this patchset. I've > updated/tested my local build with your patches and included the big > endian fix. > > Feel free to pull this patch into your patchset (or hopefully upstream > merges first :-) ) > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/895499/ > > Upstream of an updated big endian support patch > https://github.com/npitre/cramfs-tools/pull/1 > > Tested-by: Matt Weber Great! I struggled with trying to get a PowerPC QEMU up and running, so I never completed this task. However, I will say this: When discussing to incorporate that old endian patch back into Nicolas's repo, he requested that the new functions have a more proper prefix like swap_xxx. The names "fix_xxx" are not really good names to describe what they are doing. Also, Nicolas mentioned this about the original patch: > It is missing the new case where the compressed block length is stored > as an u16 at the beginning of the block. That's pretty much the only use > of u16 in the code so easy to locate. So then in that case, you would need a bswap_32() and a bswap_16() macro. However...that code is currently inside a "} else if (0) {" block, so it looks like it will never get executed anyway. So, maybe that point is irrelevant at the moment??? I would prefer to get this pulled into upstream instead of going back to adding external patches to Buildroot. So, let's wait to see what Nicolas has to say. Chris