On 16/8/23 22:55, Zorro Lang wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 12:33:30PM +0200, David Disseldorp wrote:
The '-f' parameter is fsck.ext# specific, where it's documented to:
Force checking even if filesystem is marked clean
_repair_test_fs() is only called on _check_test_fs() failure, so
dropping the parameter should be possible without changing ext#
behaviour.
Doing so fixes _repair_test_fs() on exfat, where fsck.exfat doesn't
support '-f'.
Signed-off-by: David Disseldorp <ddiss@xxxxxxx>
---
v2: drop -f from default case instead of splitting out exfat case
This version is good to me.
Reviewed-by: Zorro Lang <zlang@xxxxxxxxxx>
I remembered you hope to add a btrfs branch to _repair_scratch_fs and
_repair_test_fs [1]. Is that still in your plan? Anand, could you provide
more suggestions about that?
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/20230808091454.4skdyjnaxjqa7zyi@zlang-mailbox/
Thanks for bringing to my notice.
The reason fstyp=btrfs has not detected this missing part so far is
that 'fsck -t btrfs' returns 0, along with a message to use 'btrfs
check', which means repair is never invoked for the 'fstyp=btrfs'.
The appropriate repair command to use here is 'btrfs check --repair'.
However, it would be better to address this in a separate patch
as I guess some tests may fail. I will send a patch for it.
Thanks, Anand
common/rc | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
index 5c4429ed..66d270ac 100644
--- a/common/rc
+++ b/common/rc
@@ -1231,7 +1231,7 @@ _repair_test_fs()
;;
*)
# Let's hope fsck -y suffices...
- fsck -t $FSTYP -fy $TEST_DEV >$tmp.repair 2>&1
+ fsck -t $FSTYP -y $TEST_DEV >$tmp.repair 2>&1
res=$?
if test "$res" -lt 4 ; then
res=0
--
2.35.3
