Re: [Libguestfs] [PATCH] NEW API: add new api btrfs-fsck

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:33:42AM +0800, Wanlong Gao wrote: > Add the new API btrfs-fsck to check the btrfs filesystem. > Btrfs is currently under heavy development, and not suitable for > any uses other than benchmarking and review. But it'll be useful > in the near future. > > Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong(a)cn.fujitsu.com&gt; > --- > daemon/btrfs.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > generator/generator_actions.ml | 11 +++++++++++ > src/MAX_PROC_NR | 2 +- > 3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/daemon/btrfs.c b/daemon/btrfs.c > index ab3babc..62f07f3 100644 > --- a/daemon/btrfs.c > +++ b/daemon/btrfs.c > @@ -619,3 +619,20 @@ do_btrfs_set_seeding (const char *device, int svalue) > free (err); > return r; > } > + > +int > +do_btrfs_fsck (const char *device) > +{ > + char *err; > + int r; > + > + r = commandr (NULL, &err, "btrfsck", device, NULL); > + if (r == -1) { > + reply_with_error ("%s: %s", device, err); > + free (err); > + return -1; > + } > + > + free (err); > + return r; > +} This worries me. Isn't btrfsck interactive? Ordinary fsck has a meaningful exit code, but btrfsck doesn't. Will it get one in future?

> diff --git a/generator/generator_actions.ml b/generator/generator_actions.ml > index fc2df42..33ffd6b 100644 > --- a/generator/generator_actions.ml > +++ b/generator/generator_actions.ml > @@ -7232,6 +7232,17 @@ If C<devices> is an empty list, this does nothing."); > Enable or disable the seeding feature of a device that contains > a btrfs filesystem."); > > + ("btrfs_fsck", (RErr, [Device "device"], []), 332, [Optional "btrfs"], > + [InitPartition, IfAvailable "btrfs", TestRun ( > + [["mkfs_btrfs"; "/dev/sda1"; ""; ""; "NOARG"; ""; "NOARG"; "NOARG"; ""; ""]; > + ["btrfs_fsck"; "/dev/sda1"]])], > + "check a btrfs filesystem", > + "\ > +Used to check a btrfs filesystem, C<device> is the device file where the > +filesystem is stored. Put a blank line between paragraphs. > +NOTE: Btrfs is currently under heavy development, and not suitable for any > +uses other than benchmarking and review."); Instead of "NOTE:", it's better to use I<Note:> or B<Note:> (see perlpod(1)).

Rich.