From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F3AAC6FA82 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 06:05:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF3533CAD71 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 08:05:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (in-2.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 608E43CAAC7 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 08:05:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBCC0602589 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 08:05:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E75C91FA3C; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 06:05:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1663913112; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=UoG/mg9vNw3rd4DPoo2XRy0FPbr7fDczWz+EJwOV4o0=; b=riw042cvsL2bqxmKcroq4dYi5WsFsrVF3ukBU1220U/LsaaBcVO52nSp1vRyF4h5Pa7vXq HM4lJ/Po+54t7IHSkclvJEMWtOIogoBxE9DhpPyx96EYTAt+Gw4tTNjFpcdNUjOPn8+jiB QLFj2nOaI3WTpQWhKFYQKon8dbHg5Fk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1663913112; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=UoG/mg9vNw3rd4DPoo2XRy0FPbr7fDczWz+EJwOV4o0=; b=Xq1+RY/b4bQbOfNp+I1RlkJH0sBLWwgJNl2QwtYCeuE6BG990X8BbSLqPLELzgJbQoyE52 c3ng47j7hZGjdgDg== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B081813AA5; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 06:05:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id DoNdKZhMLWMOTAAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Fri, 23 Sep 2022 06:05:12 +0000 Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 08:05:10 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Li Wang Message-ID: References: <20220922210931.23982-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20220922210931.23982-2-pvorel@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-2.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/3 v2] tst_supported_fs: Unify messaging X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: LTP List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi Li, all, > > I'm not sure about this myself. Shouldn't we rather use tst_brk() and > > tst_res() instead? It's show tst_supported_fs as command. > Not exactly, looking at testcase/lib/* tools, most of them are not written > by LTP standard API, some even do not include tst_test.h. FYI I meant tst_{brk,res} message starts with filename and line, which is kind of handy. > I personally think if we want more flexibility for those small programs > as auxiliary tool, we should not apply API as dogmatism for everything. Sure > Btw, there is patch confliction when performing git-am, if you can > rebase accordingly for solving that, the whole patchset will be > great for me. I'm sorry, indeed git-am does not work. I remember rebasing it (and my remote branch is rebased), I obviously must have run git format-patch before rebasing. In case of anybody want to actually run it, it's in my fork: https://github.com/pevik/ltp/commits/fix/TST_ALL_FILESYSTEMS.v2 > Reviewed-by: Li Wang Thanks! Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp