lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:54:50 -0700
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To:	Valerie Aurora Henson <vaurora@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/17] Add progress bar for allocating block tables	-
 takes forever on large

On Nov 11, 2008  19:43 -0800, Valerie Aurora Henson wrote:
> +static errcode_t ext2fs_allocate_tables_with_progress(ext2_filsys fs)
> +{
> +	for (i = 0; i < fs->group_desc_count; i++) {
> +		progress_update(&progress, i);
> +		retval = ext2fs_allocate_group_table(fs, i, (ext2fs_block_bitmap64) fs->block_map);
> +		if (retval)
> +			return retval;
> +	}

Does it make sense to only update the progress periodically instead of for
every group?  Since this is a memory operation, I suspect the console
output slows it down noticably, and would spew a ton of garbage into
console logs and such.  Something like:

	for (i = 0; i < fs->group_desc_count; i++) {
		if (i & 256 == 255)
			progress_update(&progress, i);
		retval = ext2fs_allocate_group_table(fs, i, (ext2fs_block_bitmap64) fs->block_map);
		if (retval)
			return retval;
	}
	progress_close(&progress);


Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists