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