Hi Andreas, thanks a lot for your second review!! :) > The big question is whether Ted will accept it. My hope rests in the fact that Ted did not (yet) absolutely refuse to add such a feature in their comments to the github pull request [1]. XD [1] https://github.com/tytso/e2fsprogs/pull/118 > These parts of the change is specific to your system and should probably > be removed from the patch. Ah thank you for that clarification. I was a bit puzzled that you have a generated file tracked by git and was unsure what the policy is for updating it. This should be fixed now. > Rather than having an inline #ifdef here, this could be structured like > the following in create_file_libarchive.c: I now see that you already tried to tell me how you'd like to see this in an earlier mail but I didn't understand what you wanted to tell me. Thank you for spelling it out for me. I hope my changes now look as you expected. I agree that it looks much better now. > If we expect larger files, having a 1MB or 16MB buffer is not outrageous > these days, and would probably improve the performance noticeably. In my own use-case I want to convert tarballs containing chroot environments into an ext4 image. I'm on a fairly limited system (ARM Cortex A53 @ 1.5 GHz and 4 GB RAM) and loading up a YouTube video in Firefox takes about half a minute until it starts playing. So I'd expect that if buffer size has any meaningful impact it would show up as a significant difference on my system with its limited resources. So I converted a chroot tarball of 429 MB to an ext4 image 10 times for each buffer size and averaged the runtime as well as recorded the fastest of the 10 runs. These are the results: COPY_FILE_BUFLEN time in s min in s 65536 145.576 14.240 1048576 144.866 14.098 16777216 147.142 14.317 What else can I test? It seems that a 1 MB buffer is slightly fastest. But I still didn't finish that part of the patch because I'm not sure whether my benchmark should be improved or whether it looks different on other platforms. Thanks! cheers, josch Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues (1): mke2fs: the -d option can now handle tarball input MCONFIG.in | 1 + configure | 52 +++ configure.ac | 9 + debugfs/Makefile.in | 25 +- lib/config.h.in | 3 + lib/ext2fs/Makefile.in | 25 +- misc/Makefile.in | 17 +- misc/create_inode.c | 45 ++- misc/create_inode.h | 10 + misc/create_inode_libarchive.c | 699 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ misc/create_inode_libarchive.h | 10 + misc/mke2fs.8.in | 10 +- misc/mke2fs.c | 12 +- tests/m_rootgnutar/expect | 141 +++++++ tests/m_rootgnutar/output.sed | 5 + tests/m_rootgnutar/script | 125 ++++++ tests/m_rootpaxtar/expect | 87 ++++ tests/m_rootpaxtar/mkpaxtar.pl | 69 ++++ tests/m_rootpaxtar/output.sed | 5 + tests/m_rootpaxtar/script | 44 +++ tests/m_roottar/expect | 208 ++++++++++ tests/m_roottar/mktar.pl | 62 +++ tests/m_roottar/output.sed | 5 + tests/m_roottar/script | 57 +++ 24 files changed, 1691 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) create mode 100644 misc/create_inode_libarchive.c create mode 100644 misc/create_inode_libarchive.h create mode 100644 tests/m_rootgnutar/expect create mode 100644 tests/m_rootgnutar/output.sed create mode 100644 tests/m_rootgnutar/script create mode 100644 tests/m_rootpaxtar/expect create mode 100644 tests/m_rootpaxtar/mkpaxtar.pl create mode 100644 tests/m_rootpaxtar/output.sed create mode 100644 tests/m_rootpaxtar/script create mode 100644 tests/m_roottar/expect create mode 100644 tests/m_roottar/mktar.pl create mode 100644 tests/m_roottar/output.sed create mode 100644 tests/m_roottar/script -- 2.40.0
