Re: [PATCH 3/3] btrfs-progs: misc-tests: add test to ensure the restored image can be mounted

[Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>]

On 2021/4/17 上午1:46, David Sterba wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 08:50:47PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> This new test case is to make sure the restored image file has been
>> properly enlarged so that newer kernel won't complain.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
>> ---
>>   .../047-image-restore-mount/test.sh           | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100755 tests/misc-tests/047-image-restore-mount/test.sh
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/misc-tests/047-image-restore-mount/test.sh b/tests/misc-tests/047-image-restore-mount/test.sh
>> new file mode 100755
>> index 000000000000..7f12afa2bab6
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/tests/misc-tests/047-image-restore-mount/test.sh
>> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
>> +#!/bin/bash
>> +# Verify that the restored image of an empty btrfs can still be mounted
>                                                  ^^^^^
>
> I've seen that in patches and comments, the use of word 'btrfs' instead
> of 'filesystem' sounds a bit inappropriate to me, so I change it
> whenever I see it. It's perhaps matter of taste and style, one can write
> it also as 'btrfs filesystem' but that may belong to some more polished
> documentation, so you can go with just 'filesystem'.
>
Thanks for pointing this out.

I'll use 'filesystem' from now on.

Thanks,
Qu