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 0FE8CC41513 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:41:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1345827AbjHPTkq (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Aug 2023 15:40:46 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43664 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1345840AbjHPTkS (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Aug 2023 15:40:18 -0400 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B4F61FE1 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 12:40:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E21131F86C; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:40:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1692214811; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=0yxRmOnoegHg1YACTNg8XJKxxiizD6lgO1BrvCGzzos=; b=k7OgY6p5TE5MxUHAclpqpoi0FMdRXSzIDhNnF1N3Qs0imxtQfBt806J506cxwvXq2tsrig drxApZsYeQEffyqUk7WipSbCF3oH9sywUMZom74GQHk38ZFVuafgvYhBmouHDmuz2J7USs m6//bBukn+/RCjCF9t7LoJaoAsbd1xo= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1692214811; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=0yxRmOnoegHg1YACTNg8XJKxxiizD6lgO1BrvCGzzos=; b=2kHs/QE8vmAQtpvItyhWGG0OOcExSx/wfG5p3O5puiN9zD2s4TvZ9yTTR8eSo9HDlOT+/j /T8+5TIlicb1ebCQ== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC6481353E; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:40:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id hBx5LBsm3WQjDwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:40:11 +0000 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 21:42:54 +0200 From: David Disseldorp To: Zorro Lang Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, Anand Jain Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] common/rc: drop 'fsck -f' parameter from _repair_test_fs Message-ID: <20230816214254.4fc968c2@echidna.fritz.box> In-Reply-To: <20230816145543.ic73cnwhzayuivag@zlang-mailbox> References: <20230816103330.961-1-ddiss@suse.de> <20230816145543.ic73cnwhzayuivag@zlang-mailbox> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 22:55:43 +0800, 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 > > --- > > v2: drop -f from default case instead of splitting out exfat case > > This version is good to me. > > Reviewed-by: Zorro Lang Thanks. > 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? Yes, that's still my plan, but I was hoping to get some more input on whether "btrfs check --repair ..." is sufficient before proposing the change. Cheers, David