Search Results

Search found 3 results on 1 pages for 'sigvardsen'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Get length of bits used in int

  - by sigvardsen

  If you have the binary number 10110 how can I get it to return 11111? e.g a new binary number that sets all bits to 1 after the first 1, there are some likewise examples listed below: 101 should return 111 (3 bit length) 011 should return 11 (2 bit length) 11100 should be return 11111 (5 bit length) 101010101 should return 111111111 (9 bit length) How can this be obtained the easiest way in Java? I could come up with some methods but they are not very "pretty".

  Read the article

• Count bits used in int

  - by sigvardsen

  If you have the binary number 10110 how can I get it to return 5? e.g a number that tells how many bits are used? There are some likewise examples listed below: 101 should return 3 000000011 should return 2 11100 should return 5 101010101 should return 9 How can this be obtained the easiest way in Java? I have come up with the following method but can i be done faster: public static int getBitLength(int value) { int l = 1; if (value >> 16 > 0) { value = value >> 16; l += 16; } if (value >> 8 > 0) { value = value >> 8; l += 8; } if (value >> 4 > 0) { value = value >> 4; l += 4; } if (value >> 2 > 0) { value = value >> 2; l += 2; } if (value >> 1 > 0) { value = value >> 1; l += 1; } return l; }

  Read the article

• Fastest inline-assembly spinlock

  - by sigvardsen

  I'm writing a multithreaded application in c++, where performance is critical. I need to use a lot of locking while copying small structures between threads, for this I have chosen to use spinlocks. I have done some research and speed testing on this and I found that most implementations are roughly equally fast: Microsofts CRITICAL_SECTION, with SpinCount set to 1000, scores about 140 time units Implementing this algorithm with Microsofts InterlockedCompareExchange scores about 95 time units Ive also tried to use some inline assembly with __asm {} using something like this code and it scores about 70 time units, but I am not sure that a proper memory barrier has been created. Edit: The times given here are the time it takes for 2 threads to lock and unlock the spinlock 1,000,000 times. I know this isn't a lot of difference but as a spinlock is a heavily used object, one would think that programmers would have agreed on the fastest possible way to make a spinlock. Googling it leads to many different approaches however. I would think this aforementioned method would be the fastest if implemented using inline assembly and using the instruction CMPXCHG8B instead of comparing 32bit registers. Furthermore memory barriers must be taken into account, this could be done by LOCK CMPXHG8B (I think?), which guarantees "exclusive rights" to the shared memory between cores. At last [some suggests] that for busy waits should be accompanied by NOP:REP that would enable Hyper-threading processors to switch to another thread, but I am not sure whether this is true or not? From my performance-test of different spinlocks, it is seen that there is not much difference, but for purely academic purpose I would like to know which one is fastest. However as I have extremely limited experience in the assembly-language and with memory barriers, I would be happy if someone could write the assembly code for the last example I provided with LOCK CMPXCHG8B and proper memory barriers in the following template: __asm { spin_lock: ;locking code. spin_unlock: ;unlocking code. }

  Read the article

1