From: andreas@rid-net.de Subject: Re: defragmentation of boot related files Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 22:16:28 +0200 Message-ID: <4C76CB9C.2060207@rid-net.de> References: <4C7505C3.1070509@rid-net.de> <4C762AF3.8020303@sx.jp.nec.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Greg Freemyer , k-mio@sx.jp.nec.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mo-p00-ob.rzone.de ([81.169.146.160]:19432 "EHLO mo-p00-ob.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753902Ab0HZUQt (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:16:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: hi, >> Usage: e4defrag -r directory...| device... >> e4defrag -r base_file move_file...<--- new >> The new interface looks nice. As I see it's easy to implement cause only the main-function must be modified. If you have no objections, I will do it myself and send you the patch to review it. > I suspect the original idea would work better because it is more > likely to pack the libs / files into perfectly contiguous block > ranges. I don't know if it makes a difference for the block allocator. Even though you know the size of all files to be moved. For a better result, may it be possible to create a base_file whose inode is part of an empty block group? Andreas