From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 16:03:29 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [U-Boot, RESEND, v5, 3/7] test: fs: Add filesystem integrity checks In-Reply-To: <20190213111527.1525-4-jjhiblot@ti.com> References: <20190213111527.1525-4-jjhiblot@ti.com> Message-ID: <20190409200329.GV4664@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 12:15:23PM +0100, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: > We need to make sure that file writes,file creation, etc. are properly > performed and do not corrupt the filesystem. > To help with this, introduce the assert_fs_integrity() function that > executes the appropriate fsck tool. It should be called at the end of any > test that modify the content/organization of the filesystem. > Currently only supports FATs and EXT4. > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Jacques Hiblot > Reviewed-by: Tom Rini OK, I'm adding in a bunch of people to CC here. The issue with this patch is that by adding fsck to our tests we see 34 FAT16/FAT32 failures: TestFsBasic.test_fs13[fat16] TestFsBasic.test_fs11[fat32] TestFsBasic.test_fs12[fat32] TestFsBasic.test_fs13[fat32] TestFsExt.test_fs_ext1[fat32] TestFsExt.test_fs_ext2[fat32] TestFsExt.test_fs_ext3[fat32] TestFsExt.test_fs_ext4[fat32] TestFsExt.test_fs_ext5[fat32] TestFsExt.test_fs_ext6[fat32] TestFsExt.test_fs_ext7[fat32] TestFsExt.test_fs_ext8[fat32] TestFsExt.test_fs_ext9[fat32] TestMkdir.test_mkdir6[fat16] TestMkdir.test_mkdir1[fat32] TestMkdir.test_mkdir2[fat32] TestMkdir.test_mkdir3[fat32] TestMkdir.test_mkdir4[fat32] TestMkdir.test_mkdir5[fat32] TestMkdir.test_mkdir6[fat32] TestUnlink.test_unlink1[fat16] TestUnlink.test_unlink2[fat16] TestUnlink.test_unlink3[fat16] TestUnlink.test_unlink4[fat16] TestUnlink.test_unlink5[fat16] TestUnlink.test_unlink6[fat16] TestUnlink.test_unlink7[fat16] TestUnlink.test_unlink1[fat32] TestUnlink.test_unlink2[fat32] TestUnlink.test_unlink3[fat32] TestUnlink.test_unlink4[fat32] TestUnlink.test_unlink5[fat32] TestUnlink.test_unlink6[fat32] TestUnlink.test_unlink7[fat32] So... I'm inclined to say that to start with, I bring this patch in and then disable FAT fsck (as I cannot see how to mark these as xfail with a comment that we need to fix them, only for FAT). But we should get these FAT problems fixed. -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: