Cool, I wanted to look at this, but was on PTO last week. It looks good to me, and I synced this to: https://github.com/alexlarsson/xfstests/commits/verity-tests To avoid drift. On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 3:14 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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. > -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Alexander Larsson Red Hat, Inc alexl@xxxxxxxxxx alexander.larsson@xxxxxxxxx
