[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220722151114.c4w7s6v6fu5hphf5@zlang-mailbox>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 23:11:14 +0800
From: Zorro Lang <zlang@...hat.com>
To: Sun Ke <sunke32@...wei.com>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, fstests@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: resize fs after resize_inode without e2fsck
On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 07:51:57AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 04:16:26PM +0800, Sun Ke wrote:
> >
> > 1. The test run fsck automatically, and complain inconsistent,I think it
> > need not run fsck.
>
> The check script always run fscks after the test. In order to
> suppress the fsck complaint, we'll need to add this after the
> resize2fs invocation:
>
> _scratch_unmount
> $DEBUGFS_PROG -w -R "set_super_value s_reserved_gdt_blocks 0" $SCRATCH_DEV \
> >>$seqres.full 2>&1
>
> This resets the s_reserved_gdt_blocks field back to zero, so the fsck
> doesn't fail. Which is fine, because the point of the test is to see
> whether the kernel dereferences a NULL pointer or not.
Or maybe just replace _reuqire_scratch with _require_scratch_nocheck, if we
corrupt the fs on SCRATCH_DEV intentionally?
Thanks,
Zorro
>
> > 2. It warn missing kernel fix, but the commit had merged.
>
> The way _fixed_by_kernel_commit works is if the test fails (for any
> reason), it prints that you MAY be missing the bugfix commit:
>
> > HINT: You _MAY_ be missing kernel fix:
> > b55c3cd102a6 ext4: add reserved GDT blocks check
>
> - Ted
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists