Re: [PATCH] generic/050: handle f2fs as nojournal filesystem

[Zorro Lang <zorro.lang@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 01:18:20PM +0000, Jan Prusakowski wrote:
> F2FS uses a checkpoint mechanism for metadata consistency rather than a
> traditional journal. Roll-forward recovery is only needed if there are
> fsync'd files since the last checkpoint.
> 
> In this test case, files are created without fsync, so there is no
> roll-forward data to replay during mount.
> 
> Therefore, F2FS does not need to write to the device to recover, and
> successfully mounts on the read-only block device. Thus, it should be
> treated as nojournal in this case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Prusakowski <jprusakowski@google.com>
> ---
>  tests/generic/050 | 12 ++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/generic/050 b/tests/generic/050
> index 3bc37175..3a641a65 100755
> --- a/tests/generic/050
> +++ b/tests/generic/050
> @@ -46,6 +46,18 @@ elif [ "$FSTYP" = "btrfs" ]; then
>  	# So for this test case, btrfs will not get any dirty log tree thus
>  	# it can be treated as "nojournal".
>  	features="nojournal"
> +elif [ "$FSTYP" = "f2fs" ]; then
> +	# F2FS uses a checkpoint mechanism for metadata consistency rather than a
> +	# traditional journal. Roll-forward recovery is only needed if there are
> +	# fsync'd files since the last checkpoint.
> +	#
> +	# In this test case, files are created without fsync, so there is no
> +	# roll-forward data to replay during mount.
> +	#
> +	# Therefore, F2FS does not need to write to the device to recover, and
> +	# successfully mounts on the read-only block device. Thus, it should be
> +	# treated as "nojournal" in this case.
> +	features="nojournal"

OK, so f2fs is similar with what btrfs does in this case.

Reviewed-by: Zorro Lang <zlang@kernel.org>

>  fi
>  _link_out_file "$features"
>  
> -- 
> 2.53.0.1213.gd9a14994de-goog
> 
>