Comment 5 for bug 1602299

Recreated on a test system. The fact that the superblock gets written to is expected. Though for ppc64el this seems to go wrong at early stages. I am comparing the results on a ppc64el vm and a x86 vm. After setting up bcache and attaching the cache to the backing dev, the output of bcache-super-show already differs from sysfs information on ppc64el. On x86 this in consistent (which means the superblock was already updated by the kernel at that stage).

On ppc64el the differences are:
- cache dev
  * sb.version is still 0 (should be 3)
  * dev.cache.ordered no (is yes on x86)
- backing dev
  * dev.data.cache_state detached (should be clean)

Created a vm dump to investigate deeper into this.