[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [kmip] Groups - Sun 64-bit Binary Alignment Proposal v2 (Sun64-bit Binary Alignment Proposal.pdf) uploaded
Hi Scott, Scott Kipp wrote: > Matt, > > When I look at your two most recent proposals posted on the 6th and the > 1st, here is a summary of the different values in section 9.1.1: > > Proposal Item Tag Item Type > 32 Bit 32 bits 32 bits > 64 bit 3 byte 1 byte > > Please help me understand where the 16 bit fields are. > > The details are more subtle. I probably need to create a picture to do this justice. Here's a brief description: 32-bit Proposal: 32-bit Tag: '42' | (00 or 01) | (16-bit Tag enumeration) 32-bit Type: 00 00 00 (8-bit type) 64-bit Proposal: 24-bit Tag: ('42' or '54') | (16-bit Tag enumeration) 8-bit Type: (8-bit type) The nuance is that in the 64-bit proposal, the leading 16-bits of the Tag are consolidated to 8-bits, leaving 16-bits for general Tag values. I'll put a nice picture together to describe this. > Do you have any data as to how long it will take to process 32 bit or 64 > bit fields with 64 bit processors? Won't the difference be in the > microsecond range? I don't think they will amount to much difference I don't know what the performance difference is. I did hear of others in the group, though, who were noticing the mis-alignment issue in relation to 64-bit timestamps. Can anyone comment? Cheers, -Matt
begin:vcard fn:Matt Ball n:Ball;Matthew org:Sun Microsystems, Inc.;Key Management adr:;;500 El Dorado Blvd, Bldg 5;Broomfield;CO;80021;U.S.A. email;internet:matthew.ball@sun.com title:Staff Engineer tel;work:303-272-7580 tel;fax:303-272-3023 tel;cell:303-717-2717 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://www.sun.com version:2.1 end:vcard
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]