9 ms·

Some firm called CodeThink have been instigating it for RISC-V lately: https://www.codethink.co.uk/articles/risc-v-big-endian-support-runtime-testing/ https://w

• fredoralive 10mo ago
  The idea of more big endianness in Linux wasn’t particularly welcomed by Linus Torvalds however: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-%3DwgYcOiFvsJzFb%2BHfB4n6Wj6zM5H5EghUMfpXSCzyQVSfA@mail.gmail.com/t/#mce138059dc56014643bbda330810183031ef5c06 https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-%3DwgYcOiFvsJzFb%2BHfB4n6W...
• mort96 10mo ago
  We just have to pray that the relevant standardization bodies recognise this for the terrible idea that it is and don't ratify it.
• camel-cdr 10mo ago
  The funny thing is that their isn't even a standardized RISC-V BE ABI yet.
• happymellon 10mo ago
  > Since Codethink has a history of bringing big-endian support to traditionally little-endian processor architectures But why? This sounds like a company that should have been a dissertation.
  • pm215 10mo ago
    They're a consultancy: ultimately they do things because either some company paid them to do it, or because they think it will help bring in future business. There are definitely companies out there who want to run "wrong endian" configs -- traditionally this was "I have a big endian embedded networking device and I want to move away from a dying architecture (e.g. MIPS or PPC) but I really don't want to try to find all the places in my enormous legacy codebase where we accidentally or deliberately assumed big endian". Personally I'm not in favour of having the niche usecase tail wag the general toolchain dog, and I think that's the sentiment behind Linus's remarks.