From neversetsun@ustc.edu Fri Feb 29 07:27:38 2008
Received: from smtp.ustc.edu.cn ([202.38.64.16] helo=ustc.edu.cn)
	by stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <neversetsun@ustc.edu>) id 1JUzeN-0005X4-V4
	for yaffs@lists.aleph1.co.uk; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:27:38 +0000
Received: (eyou send program); Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:27:30 +0800
Message-ID: <404270050.16970@ustc.edu.cn>
X-EYOUMAIL-SMTPAUTH: shizheng@mail.ustc.edu.cn
Received: from unknown (HELO [127.0.0.1]) (202.38.79.82)
	by 202.38.64.8 with SMTP; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:27:30 +0800
Message-ID: <47C7B390.9060703@ustc.edu>
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:26:08 +0800
From: "shizheng@Alumni" <neversetsun@ustc.edu>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: manningc2@actrix.gen.nz,
 yaffs@lists.aleph1.co.uk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GB2312
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 202.38.64.16
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: neversetsun@ustc.edu
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on
	stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.2.3
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:23:22 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk)
Subject: [Yaffs] [Yaffs2]Tnode tallness and the maximum chunk id
X-BeenThere: yaffs@lists.aleph1.co.uk
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of YAFFS NAND flash filesystem <yaffs.lists.aleph1.co.uk>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.aleph1.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/yaffs>, 
	<mailto:yaffs-request@lists.aleph1.co.uk?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.aleph1.co.uk/lurker/list/yaffs.html>
List-Post: <mailto:yaffs@lists.aleph1.co.uk>
List-Help: <mailto:yaffs-request@lists.aleph1.co.uk?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.aleph1.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/yaffs>,
	<mailto:yaffs-request@lists.aleph1.co.uk?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:27:38 -0000

Hi,
The YAFFS_TNODES_MAX_LEVEL is 6, so I think the maximum chunk id occupies
3*6+4=22 bits, which evaluates 0x003fffff. But YAFFS_MAX_CHUNK_ID is defined
as 0x000fffff, why?

I guess maybe it gets a little mess with chunk group size which is
usually 2^2.
Or do I mistake anything?

best wishes, shizheng


