On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Filipe David Manana <fdman...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Qu Wenruo <quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> Although btrfsck test case support pure image dump(tar.xz), it is still
>> too large for some images, e.g, a small 64M image with about 3 levels
>> (level 0~2) metadata will produce about 2.6M after xz zip, which is too
>> large for a single binary commit.
>>
>> However btrfs-image -c9 will works much finer, the above image with
>> btrfs-image dump will only be less than 200K, which is quite reasonable.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>>  tests/fsck-tests.sh | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/fsck-tests.sh b/tests/fsck-tests.sh
>> index 8987d04..007e5b0 100644
>> --- a/tests/fsck-tests.sh
>> +++ b/tests/fsck-tests.sh
>> @@ -22,16 +22,38 @@ run_check()
>>         "$@" >> $RESULT 2>&1 || _fail "failed: $@"
>>  }
>>
>> +# For complicated fsck repair case,
>> +# where even repairing is OK, it may still report problem before or after
>> +# reparing since the repair needs several loops to repair all the problems
>> +# but report checks it before all repair loops done
>> +run_check_no_fail()
>> +{
>> +       echo "############### $@" >> $RESULT 2>&1
>> +       "$@" >> $RESULT 2>&1
>> +}
>> +
>>  rm -f $RESULT
>>
>>  # test rely on corrupting blocks tool
>>  run_check make btrfs-corrupt-block
>>
>> +# Supported test image formats:
>> +# 1) btrfs-image dump(.img files)
>>  # Some broken filesystem images are kept as .img files, created by the tool
>> -# btrfs-image, and others are kept as .tar.xz files that contain raw 
>> filesystem
>> +# btrfs-image
>> +#
>> +# 2) binary image dump only(only test.img in .tar.xz)
>> +# Some are kept as .tar.xz files that contain raw filesystem
>>  # image (the backing file of a loop device, as a sparse file). The reason 
>> for
>>  # keeping some as tarballs of raw images is that for these cases btrfs-image
>>  # isn't able to preserve all the (bad) filesystem structure for some reason.
>> +# This provides great flexibility at the cost of large file size.
>> +#
>> +# 3) script generated dump(generate_image.sh + needed things in .tar.gz)
>> +# The image is generated by the generate_image.sh script alone the needed
>> +# files in the tarball, normally a quite small btrfs-image dump.
>> +# This one combines the advatange of relative small btrfs-image and the
>> +# flexibility to support corrupted image.
>>  for i in $(find $here/tests/fsck-tests -name '*.img' -o -name '*.tar.xz' | 
>> sort)
>>  do
>>         echo "     [TEST]    $(basename $i)"
>> @@ -39,16 +61,24 @@ do
>>
>>         extension=${i#*.}
>>
>> +       if [ -f generate_image.sh ]; then
>> +               rm generate_image.sh
>> +       fi
>> +
>>         if [ $extension == "img" ]; then
>>                 run_check $here/btrfs-image -r $i test.img
>>         else
>>                 run_check tar xJf $i
>>         fi
>>
>> +       if [ -x generate_image.sh ]; then
>> +               ./generate_image.sh
>> +       fi
>> +
>>         $here/btrfsck test.img >> $RESULT 2>&1
>>         [ $? -eq 0 ] && _fail "btrfsck should have detected corruption"
>>
>> -       run_check $here/btrfsck --repair test.img
>> +       run_check_no_fail $here/btrfsck --repair test.img
>>         run_check $here/btrfsck test.img
>>  done
>
> So another thing I would like to see is doing a more comprehensive
> verification that the repair code worked as expected. Currently we
> only check that a readonly fsck, after running fsck --repair, returns
> 0.
>
> For the improvements you've been doing, it's equally important to
> verify that --repair recovered the inodes, links, etc to the
> lost+found directory (or whatever is the directory's name).
>
> So perhaps adding a verify.sh script to the tarball for example?

Or, forgot before, it might be better to do such verification/test in
xfstests since we can create the fs and use the new btrfs-progs
programs to corrupt leafs/nodes. xfstests has a lot of infrastructure
already and probably run by a lot more people (compared to the fsck
tests of btrfs-progs).

>
> Thanks
>
>>
>> --
>> 2.1.3
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
>> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
>
> --
> Filipe David Manana,
>
> "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
>  Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
>  That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."



-- 
Filipe David Manana,

"Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
 Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
 That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to