On 3/14/25 3:27 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 08:13:27PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
Add tests for the exfat filesystem. These tests are largely an
extension of the FS_GENERIC tests with the following notable
exceptions.
The filesystem image for exfat tests is generated using combination
of exfatprogs mkfs.exfat and python fattools. The fattols are capable
of generating exfat filesystem images too, but this is not used, the
fattools are only used as a replacement for dosfstools 'mcopy' and
'mdir', which are used to insert files and directories into existing
fatfs images and list existing fatfs images respectively, without the
need for superuser access to mount such images.
The exfat filesystem has no filesystem specific command, there is only
the generic filesystem command interface, therefore check_ubconfig()
has to special case exfat and skip check for CONFIG_CMD_EXFAT and
instead check for CONFIG_FS_EXFAT.
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de>
---
[snip]
diff --git a/test/py/tests/test_fs/fstest_helpers.py
b/test/py/tests/test_fs/fstest_helpers.py
index c1447b4d43e..8f2e1fcf47d 100644
--- a/test/py/tests/test_fs/fstest_helpers.py
+++ b/test/py/tests/test_fs/fstest_helpers.py
@@ -9,6 +9,8 @@ def assert_fs_integrity(fs_type, fs_img):
try:
if fs_type == 'ext4':
check_call('fsck.ext4 -n -f %s' % fs_img, shell=True)
+ if fs_type == 'exfat':
+ check_call('fsck.exfat -n %s' % fs_img, shell=True)
elif fs_type in ['fat12', 'fat16', 'fat32']:
check_call('fsck.fat -n %s' % fs_img, shell=True)
except CalledProcessError:
This should be elif not if? Not a big deal if there's nothing else
needing a v3 however. Everything else looks good, thanks.
Yes, it should be elif . Unfortunately, there is now a clean up change
in next which modifies test/py/tests/test_fs/test_basic.py and conflicts
badly with 3/11 in this series, so I need to carefully rebase that patch
on top of current next. I'll send V3 once it is done.
