On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 2:45 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:52 PM Alexander Larsson <alexl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 11:37 AM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> > > Alex,
> > >
> > > Verified that your verity-tests2 work as expected with v5 patches.
> >
> > To be honest I have not validated that my changes to the shared verity
> > code still works with the non-overlayfs tests. If you have a setup for
> > it it would be great if you could try the regular ext4 w/ fs-veriy
> > tests on top of the verity-test2 branch.
> >
>
> There is no problem with "./check -g verity" on ext4
> those tests pass.
>
> However, "./check -overlay -g generic/verity" fails several test:
> Failures: generic/572 generic/573 generic/574 generic/575 generic/577
> because _require_scratch_verity falsely claims that overlay (over ext4)
> supports verify, but then FS_IOC_ENABLE_VERITY actually fails
> during the test.
>
> Instead of changing _require_scratch_verity() as you did,
> you should consider passing optional arguments, e.g.:
> local fstyp=${1:-$FSTYP}
> and calling it from _require_scratch_overlay_verity() with the
> $OVL_BASE_* values.
>
FWIW, I pushed this solution to
https://github.com/amir73il/xfstests/commits/verity-tests
It's ugly, but it works.
Thanks,
Amir.
