From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3651AC001DB for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2023 17:49:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229847AbjHGRtb (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Aug 2023 13:49:31 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44262 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229593AbjHGRta (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Aug 2023 13:49:30 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09D38172C for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2023 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1691430522; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=7c8JZ1QBgIq3H57/Xs2jbZ4oT4tiAWgA+cNSuJzXR88=; b=JEd8BbuFQ7tvEOdEyYClHPGMYOqtto6j0e1OTfoSk6mlfNfey55FYC0JH1GTFg/pODUSdt VhDjA6cEvBXrxaMY3SVf154qyqpmyXpuux4KUN4lc+TZ9wvp24OqqcwyuXCmr5X5YZdHTF CSNm97HYDaFt4YAmRY9yBoPL560r7rw= Received: from mail-pg1-f197.google.com (mail-pg1-f197.google.com [209.85.215.197]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-133-nKMmZQWSNfOiVSWbewj5HA-1; Mon, 07 Aug 2023 13:48:40 -0400 X-MC-Unique: nKMmZQWSNfOiVSWbewj5HA-1 Received: by mail-pg1-f197.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-56357814339so2920109a12.3 for ; Mon, 07 Aug 2023 10:48:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1691430519; x=1692035319; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=7c8JZ1QBgIq3H57/Xs2jbZ4oT4tiAWgA+cNSuJzXR88=; b=Xof/KHmZCYU36LA/sumDFlEPN4qTWtqdqNzgYQTS70Yh2WY7DBdBUyfh0+2b9N8Nxg NuNTRLSWgTckKIRo3F3QI5xD0pxHYbS+tYrlEEjuMeC0XjoZRCj/sRs19rr+kJdw7RV9 xxq6QphQ8GP+veRAA/D5dcNJtIyZ67eSmtqHt6Jj0Aw+BNU9jtEPc4hYJYKkItMFv1Zd uKxzT624PJmZV8QtyFbf2aSVVSuAbnBQ50VYiCD0HcpCbQoaI7yNwOU211Z6l8fTH5lz VSezwVfouIj2pnS3VFwRtN/3lFRpiKlAoicV+oVkji2ouJfAhU5KWO77Svac61jp1m4a mrkg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxQ7oTLwYj47uPIKjrp4U0yyUAwCHlrFnFGr7FVuL2cyUy6CskN fYaqxOrAyCV6/BYlkF5KZzyjRB11g/LJVy3jQ/khQtEuObborVU0GmmjTIHsMXzmTqi4ZGhDuK7 uJjWr04fZ2OWlp+sdyA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:549f:b0:133:fd64:8d48 with SMTP id i31-20020a056a20549f00b00133fd648d48mr10101868pzk.4.1691430519496; Mon, 07 Aug 2023 10:48:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFQD/IRSA0BmC+SG8GTJalo5Xx4bxLNTvarhdhW5SHobNefMSnBch0OwIgYeQ/PBRwunS/RCQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:549f:b0:133:fd64:8d48 with SMTP id i31-20020a056a20549f00b00133fd648d48mr10101851pzk.4.1691430519190; Mon, 07 Aug 2023 10:48:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zlang-mailbox ([43.228.180.230]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f26-20020aa782da000000b00682b2fbd20fsm6474615pfn.31.2023.08.07.10.48.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 07 Aug 2023 10:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 01:48:35 +0800 From: Zorro Lang To: David Disseldorp Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, linkinjeon@kernel.org, sj1557.seo@samsung.com, "Darrick J. Wong" , Theodore Ts'o Subject: Re: [PATCH] common/rc: drop '-f' parameter from fsck.exfat Message-ID: <20230807174835.moxyuvx4mp47pvky@zlang-mailbox> References: <20230807112850.9198-1-ddiss@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230807112850.9198-1-ddiss@suse.de> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 01:28:50PM +0200, David Disseldorp wrote: > fsck.exfat doesn't support the '-f' flag, so add a special case to > _repair_test_fs(). I'm wondering why _repair_scratch_fs() doesn't have the '-f', but the _repair_test_fs() has it. Looks like the '-f' option was for extN fs originally, it's not a fsck common option, but in fsck.ext4. So I think the '-f' might not be a necessary option. As _repair_scratch_fs works without it, can we just remove the '-f' from _repair_test_fs()? As _repair_test_fs was added by Ted, and _repair_scratch_fs was added by Darrick, so CC them to get more review -- do we real need the '-f' or not by default :) Thanks, Zorro > > Signed-off-by: David Disseldorp > --- > common/rc | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc > index 5c4429ed..ac7e50f1 100644 > --- a/common/rc > +++ b/common/rc > @@ -1229,6 +1229,14 @@ _repair_test_fs() > res=$? > fi > ;; > + exfat) > + # exfat doesn't support -f > + fsck -t $FSTYP -y $TEST_DEV >$tmp.repair 2>&1 > + res=$? > + if ((res < 4)); then > + res=0 > + fi > + ;; > *) > # Let's hope fsck -y suffices... > fsck -t $FSTYP -fy $TEST_DEV >$tmp.repair 2>&1 > -- > 2.35.3 >