> On Dec 18, 2023, at 4:04 PM, David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > But adding 1 "0" bit is not sufficient for handling order-2 folios (P = 4), only for handling order-1 folios. So what the current approach does is the following (P = 4): > > RMAP-ID | | Subid | > ----------------------------------- > 0 | 0000 | 0 | 0000 0000 > 1 | 0001 | 1 | 0000 0001 > 2 | 0010 | 5 | 0000 0101 > 3 | 0011 | 6 | 0000 0110 > 4 | 0100 | 25 | 0001 1001 > 5 | 0101 | 26 | 0001 1010 > 6 | 0110 | 30 | 0001 1110 > 7 | 0111 | 31 | 0001 1111 > 8 | 1000 | 125 | 0111 1101 > 9 | 1001 | 126 | 0111 1110 > 10 | 1010 | 130 | 1000 0010 > 11 | 1011 | 131 | 1000 0011 > 12 | 1100 | 150 | 1001 0110 > 13 | 1101 | 151 | 1001 0111 > 14 | 1110 | 155 | 1001 1011 > 15 | 1111 | 156 | 1001 1100 Yes, of course. Silly me. You want to take advantage of the counter not saturating for orders K where K-1 is not a power of 2. I get your point. Not sure whether it worth the complexity though…
