Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1998 15:03:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Simon Shapiro <shimon@simon-shapiro.org> To: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> Cc: freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Help - No htonq, ntohq Message-ID: <XFMail.980905150302.shimon@simon-shapiro.org> In-Reply-To: <199809042227.IAA12990@cimlogic.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Birrell, On 04-Sep-98 you wrote:
> Simon Shapiro wrote:
> > Can anyone suggest a clean, portable way to support binary
> > competability on
> > 64bit integers between an Alpha and IA?
>
> int64_t & u_int64_t
These give source compatability. I need binary compatability. Let me
expand; I am working on a new High Availability, large scale file server.
The entire server stores all numeric data as 64bit quantities (the decision
to do so is a bit outside the scope of this note :-). Part of the HAS
concept is integral support for clustering. I.E. Multiple nodes/hosts can
concurrently access the same physical filesystem. To ensure portability, I
need to store these values in a universal format.
> > We have hton{l,s} but these are good only for 16 & 32 bit values.
>
> I think hton{l,s} should be kept strictly for _network_ code.
See my comment above. You can view my need as a network need :-)
> > What is the exact Alpha byte order? 12345678, 87654321, 43218765, ...
> ^^^^^^^^
> Little endian.
Thanx! Gone are the VAX orders, then...
Simon
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.980905150302.shimon>