On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 09:35:52AM -0700, lakshmipathi.g@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > If btrfs-corrupt-block is in bad shape, then corruption scripts around > them won't help in long term. > > Yes, documentation for btrfs-corrupt-block needs improvement. imo, > re-arranged priority will be like : (5), (1)/(3) then (4). Agree that > some corner cases, having static image is best option, i think the > corruption test-case needs to be mixture of both static-images and > scripts. Both approaches have their pros and cons so I'll accept both. The functionality provided by the corrupt block utility can be used, any changes to the command line UI will be also applied to the test scripts. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
