Add fix from upstream for slow tune2fs usage #253162 by candrews.

(Portage version: 2.2_rc20/cvs/Linux 2.6.28 x86_64)

1 files changed, 99 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/sys-fs/e2fsprogs/files/e2fsprogs-1.41.3-tune2fs-opt.patch b/sys-fs/e2fsprogs/files/e2fsprogs-1.41.3-tune2fs-opt.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..35e8a57fa3a4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/sys-fs/e2fsprogs/files/e2fsprogs-1.41.3-tune2fs-opt.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+http://bugs.gentoo.org/253162
+
+From 27c6de45a4187a348ec0960472d4a113ee6ea425 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
+Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 00:32:39 -0500
+Subject: [PATCH] tune2fs: Fix inefficient O(n**2) algorithms when expanding the inode size
+
+When running "tune2fs -I 256" on moderate to large filesystems, the
+time required to run tune2fs can take many hours (20+ before some
+users gave up in disgust).  This was due to some O(n**2) and O(n*m)
+algorithms in move_block() and inode_scan_and_fix(), respectively.
+
+Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
+---
+ misc/tune2fs.c |   25 +++++++++++++------------
+ 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/misc/tune2fs.c b/misc/tune2fs.c
+index b29b344..e72518a 100644
+--- a/misc/tune2fs.c
++++ b/misc/tune2fs.c
+@@ -1011,13 +1011,13 @@ static int move_block(ext2_filsys fs, ext2fs_block_bitmap bmap)
+ 	if (retval)
+ 		return retval;
+ 
+-	for (blk = fs->super->s_first_data_block;
+-			blk < fs->super->s_blocks_count; blk++) {
++	for (new_blk = blk = fs->super->s_first_data_block;
++	     blk < fs->super->s_blocks_count; blk++) {
+ 
+ 		if (!ext2fs_test_block_bitmap(bmap, blk))
+ 			continue;
+ 
+-		retval = ext2fs_new_block(fs, blk, NULL, &new_blk);
++		retval = ext2fs_new_block(fs, new_blk, NULL, &new_blk);
+ 		if (retval)
+ 			goto err_out;
+ 
+@@ -1068,12 +1068,14 @@ static int process_block(ext2_filsys fs EXT2FS_ATTR((unused)),
+ 			 e2_blkcnt_t blockcnt EXT2FS_ATTR((unused)),
+ 			 blk_t ref_block EXT2FS_ATTR((unused)),
+ 			 int ref_offset EXT2FS_ATTR((unused)),
+-			 void *priv_data EXT2FS_ATTR((unused)))
++			 void *priv_data)
+ {
+ 	int ret = 0;
+ 	blk_t new_blk;
++	ext2fs_block_bitmap bmap = (ext2fs_block_bitmap) priv_data;
+ 
+-
++	if (!ext2fs_test_block_bitmap(bmap, *block_nr))
++		return 0;
+ 	new_blk = transalate_block(*block_nr);
+ 	if (new_blk) {
+ 		*block_nr = new_blk;
+@@ -1086,7 +1088,7 @@ static int process_block(ext2_filsys fs EXT2FS_ATTR((unused)),
+ 	return ret;
+ }
+ 
+-static int inode_scan_and_fix(ext2_filsys fs)
++static int inode_scan_and_fix(ext2_filsys fs, ext2fs_block_bitmap bmap)
+ {
+ 	errcode_t retval = 0;
+ 	ext2_ino_t ino;
+@@ -1122,8 +1124,8 @@ static int inode_scan_and_fix(ext2_filsys fs)
+ 		 * Do we need to fix this ??
+ 		 */
+ 
+-		if (inode.i_file_acl) {
+-
++		if (inode.i_file_acl &&
++		    ext2fs_test_block_bitmap(bmap, inode.i_file_acl)) {
+ 			blk = transalate_block(inode.i_file_acl);
+ 			if (!blk)
+ 				continue;
+@@ -1142,9 +1144,8 @@ static int inode_scan_and_fix(ext2_filsys fs)
+ 		if (!ext2fs_inode_has_valid_blocks(&inode))
+ 			continue;
+ 
+-		retval = ext2fs_block_iterate2(fs, ino, 0,
+-						block_buf, process_block,
+-						0);
++		retval = ext2fs_block_iterate2(fs, ino, 0, block_buf,
++					       process_block, bmap);
+ 		if (retval)
+ 			goto err_out;
+ 
+@@ -1344,7 +1345,7 @@ static int resize_inode(ext2_filsys fs, unsigned long new_size)
+ 	if (retval)
+ 		goto err_out;
+ 
+-	retval = inode_scan_and_fix(fs);
++	retval = inode_scan_and_fix(fs, bmap);
+ 	if (retval)
+ 		goto err_out;
+ 
+-- 
+1.6.0.6
+