Re: [PATCH 1/3] Initial bcachefs support

Kent Overstreet
2021-05-24T04:04:38Z

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:56:04AM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 06:51:49PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > > > ;;
> > > > @@ -1179,6 +1197,19 @@ _repair_scratch_fs()
> > > > fi
> > > > return $res
> > > > ;;
> > > > + bcachefs)
> > > > + fsck -t $FSTYP -n $SCRATCH_DEV 2>&1
> > >
> > > _repair_scratch_fs() is supposed to actually fix the errors, does
> > > "fsck -n" fix errors for bcachefs?
> >
> > No - but with bcachefs fsck finding errors _always_ indicates a bug, so for the
> > purposes of these tests I think this is the right thing to do - I don't want the
> > tests to pass if fsck is finding and fixing errors.
>
> Then _check_scratch_fs() should be used instead, which will fail the
> test if any fsck finds any corruptions. _repair_scratch_fs() is meant to
> fix errors, and only report failure when there's unfixable errors.

I see no reason to make such a change to generic tests that were written for
other filesystems, when this gets me exactly what I want.