On Mon, 7 May 2018 15:54:01 +0000, Wayne Driscoll <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, the high bit convention has to change for > interfaces that accept 64 bit addresses. The issue > is that in order to change the convention for 32 > bit programs, either 1 - an additional AMODE > would need to be supported by the hardware, I don't know why you think an additional AMODE would help at all. > or 2 - EVERY existing program would have to be > redesigned and retested in order to follow a new > convention. Yes, I believe we should START this process by allowing for 32-bit addressing. With a goal of only having software that runs AM64 - regardless of whether it is a 32-bit or 64-bit program. > The limited benefit of allowing for an extra 2GiB > of virtual storage to an address space that can, > using 64 bit addressing, already support 16 > exabytes - 2GiB seems like a massive waste of > resources. If high-level language compilers start following the 32-bit addressing rules, they will naturally start supporting 4 GiB with no additional effort by the programmer. BFN. Paul. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
