David Laight wrote:

> When I try to compile some of the boot code with a 64bit daddr_t
> I find that it exceeds the available space.

Which architecture is this on and what is the size limit?

> The only place it seems to be used is in the filesystem code where
> it works out which of the indirect blocks needs to be inspected.
> 
> For ufs the divide/remainder can definitely be replaced by a shift/mask
> (see diff below).

When I was trying to squeeze the pmax and alpha (and maybe some others?)
bootblocks down to size with the introduction of 64 bit daddr_t the
shift/mask method still required more space than just using 32-bit
daddr_t's - that's why I made small daddr_t an option.  I still haven't
had a chance to get these architecture's bootblocks down to size with
ufsv2 yet.

Simon.
--
Simon Burge                            <simonb@wasabisystems.com>
NetBSD Support and Service:         http://www.wasabisystems.com/