Re: [PATCH v3] fstests: btrfs/159 superblock corruption test case

[Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>]

>> +# Test if the superblock corruption is handled correctly:
>> +# 	- Test fsid miss-match (csum ok) between primary and copy superblock
>> +#	Fixed by the ML patch:
>> +#	btrfs: check if the fsid in the primary sb and copy sb are same
>> +# 	- Test if the mount fails if the primary superblock csum is
>> +#		corrupted on any disk
>> +# 	- Test if the mount does not fail if the copy1 sb csum is corrupted
>> +#	Fixed by the ML patches:
>> +#	btrfs: verify superblock checksum during scan
>> +#	btrfs: verify checksum for all devices in mount context
> 
> Do you have a tree that I can pull from? I want to make sure the test
> does pass on patched kernel, but the patchset doesn't apply on v4.16
> kernel.

We have new discussions on whether to check for the alien-superblock and
the superblock-checksum at the mount and scan time respectively. And
depending on its outcome this test-case should be modified as well. So
can you please defer this fstest patch, for now, I shall send a revised
fstest patch when kernel patches gets integrated.

In any case, if you want to give a try, those patches are base on kdave 
repo at [1].
  [1]
  https://github.com/kdave/btrfs-devel.git misc-next

Thanks, Anand

> Thanks,
> Eryu
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>