On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 01:35:02PM +0530, Lakshmipathi.G wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Lakshmipathi.G <lakshmipath...@giis.co.in>
> ---
> tests/fsck-tests/026-check-inode-link/test.sh | 30
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
> create mode 100755 tests/fsck-tests/026-check-inode-link/test.sh
>
> diff --git a/tests/fsck-tests/026-check-inode-link/test.sh
> b/tests/fsck-tests/026-check-inode-link/test.sh
> new file mode 100755
> index 0000000..6822ee2
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/fsck-tests/026-check-inode-link/test.sh
> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
> +#!/bin/bash
> +# verify that 'btrfs check --repair' fixes corrupted inode nlink field
> +
> +source $TOP/tests/common
> +
> +check_prereq btrfs-corrupt-block
> +check_prereq mkfs.btrfs
> +
> +setup_root_helper
> +prepare_test_dev 512M
Please use default size unless you really need 512M for the test
purposes.
> +
> +test_inode_nlink_field()
> +{
> + run_check $SUDO_HELPER $TOP/mkfs.btrfs -f $TEST_DEV
> +
> + run_check_mount_test_dev
> + run_check $SUDO_HELPER touch $TEST_MNT/test_nlink.txt
> +
> + # find inode_number
> + inode_number=`stat -c%i $TEST_MNT/test_nlink.txt`
> + run_check_umount_test_dev
> +
> + # corrupt nlink field of inode object
> + run_check $SUDO_HELPER $TOP/btrfs-corrupt-block -i $inode_number \
> + -f nlink $TEST_DEV
> +
> + check_image $TEST_DEV
The wrapper runs a pre-check that must detect errors, then runs --repair
and then again a plain check. Is this intended here?
I think we should try to mount the fixed image again and read the file
or check link count.
Please add shell quotation around all variables.
--
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
