On 6 December 2016 at 15:11, Julian Brown <jul...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 22:23:09 +0000 > Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> Strong 'no' for the approach of having different CPU >> names, I'm afraid. What you want is to have a CPU >> property which works like the hardware CPU's CFGEND >> signal to set the reset value of the SCTLR.EE bit. Then >> a board can use that where it would wire up CFGEND >> in real hardware, and on the command line you can >> have -cpu whatever,cfgend=yes (which is a bit ugly >> but then it's borderline whether it makes any sense at >> all for the user to be able to set the endianness on >> the commandline). > > How about something like this?
Could you send that as an inline patch rather than an attachment? Patches hidden in attachments are kind of painful to deal with. thanks -- PMM
