From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61E1055820C for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:17:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790090265; cv=none; b=QcttnnPjRD3mKgfS3/P6jm2JWLzqmx1mbm0ymq4x6PB90TVi7JNpiiO+HZ4wEX0eJXWhQ4JRQ+b2X2gPHndRYuJq4oayGY0mixwVnFLbEYQ9uJGWQLwJpsnovAVvnrpewhtHizku1O1ES/DDjV4K8h9RrM/Jm85slyTZoFYoadA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790090265; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qcQAZi3C9KEKVCBrKlQm5wPF/QzOabtzbyH89pFNqKQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=R2Tkwf/FCo3jyAXdKpFgl8gW4DpbGmdtdwwjTfbQZ1Y/lS9/vZLODrQGNnwXEgcHUNsmXj127t9oVE7kRvdwmgNwmi1iKMAiKjcEQ3CuByLYtahzcoCrEO5N6rfoNBuWGVy5RdoMM1nB+e4FjFa1zIkAyWuCdA2KNI1DklkhEgk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=c7KOIxYw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="c7KOIxYw" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D7771576; Tue, 22 Sep 2026 08:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arm.com (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2F0863FA32; Tue, 22 Sep 2026 08:17:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1790090262; bh=qcQAZi3C9KEKVCBrKlQm5wPF/QzOabtzbyH89pFNqKQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=c7KOIxYw+wpS/RrOBtHZPEoa57VsVibuLFGNxbuxwd5gOZ0PyKUaEoISzKjUkGm+O cRnFupxuwJe0JyM2CbdZiq/dPP8ao0o7SFv2+hYk1oun7k8V+WaxzzZjfFLG9EUXEY OuYRrdnKbDr0QYRRHufbQIooq5EOPRgeXMonIamE= Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 16:17:35 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Will Deacon Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Ard Biesheuvel , Eric Biggers , Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Oliver Upton , Herbert Xu , Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 12/13] arm64: Kbuild: Remove vestigial big-endian support Message-ID: References: <20260918145217.1669-1-will@kernel.org> <20260918145217.1669-13-will@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 04:10:17PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 11:24:36AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 03:52:14PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > > -choice > > > - prompt "Endianness" > > > - default CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN > > > - help > > > - Select the endianness of data accesses performed by the CPU. Userspace > > > - applications will need to be compiled and linked for the endianness > > > - that is selected here. > > > - > > > -config CPU_BIG_ENDIAN > > > - bool "Build big-endian kernel" > > > - depends on BROKEN > > > - help > > > - Say Y if you plan on running a kernel with a big-endian userspace. > > > - > > > -config CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN > > > - bool "Build little-endian kernel" > > > - help > > > - Say Y if you plan on running a kernel with a little-endian userspace. > > > - This is usually the case for distributions targeting arm64. > > > > Running the checks through an LLM found that CONFIG_GVE depends on > > X86 || CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN, so it won't be enabled anymore. > > > > I think that's the only positive test of CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN. > > Would you like me to add a '|| arm64' in there? I was a bit wary of doing > so, given that I don't have a way to test it. Removing CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN > forces the issue, somewhat. Or turn the dependency into X86 || !CPU_BIG_ENDIAN. Was arm64 the only one to define CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN before? -- Catalin