On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 06:00:15PM +0100, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: > > On 01/02/2019 16:18, Tom Rini wrote: > >On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 03:33:36PM +0100, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: > > > >>This is to check the integrity of the FS after the test operations. > >>This is useful to make sure that the operations are implemented properly, > >>and are not going to create silent corruptions. > >>Currently only the integrity of EXT4 filesystems is checked. > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhib...@ti.com> > >> > >>--- > >> > >>Changes in v2: > >>- Add a FS integrity check at the end of the FS tests > >> > >> test/py/tests/test_fs/conftest.py | 13 +++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) > >> > >>diff --git a/test/py/tests/test_fs/conftest.py > >>b/test/py/tests/test_fs/conftest.py > >>index 745ed0ed38..e742cda662 100644 > >>--- a/test/py/tests/test_fs/conftest.py > >>+++ b/test/py/tests/test_fs/conftest.py > >>@@ -216,6 +216,15 @@ def mount_fs(fs_type, device, mount_point): > >> except CalledProcessError: > >> raise > >>+ > >>+def fsck(img, fs_type): > >>+ try: > >>+ if fs_type == 'ext4': > >>+ check_call('fsck.ext4 -n -f %s' % img, shell=True) > >>+ except CalledProcessError: > >>+ raise > >>+ > >>+ > >Why don't we just call 'fsck -f -n ...' and check all filesystems? > > >Force and "make no changes" are both general fsck options and not > > Strange. those options do not appear in the help or manpage. > > I'll switch to fsck in the next version
Ugh, I take it back and blame myself. You can't just do /sbin/fsck --help and get something like I expected but didn't read closely enough to see it was plumbing down to fsck.ext4. So what you have above is right and the it falls on me to add a patch to fsck.vfat or so later. Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot