From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F9F12629C for ; Mon, 27 May 2024 16:20:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716826807; cv=none; b=I+2uQktJZHmrHINHKACMTO29eHdzFjrpU3+qeyb37sJd7eZwrefj/MR4IERo61rb+YT3cEMNbLHbncx46J6B5cvKVNV6sRA18DTGoA4XjxEC4FlWsrpzOM6DfdIoXqejd4OzbZRA2UZfVZgOxFDZ52QWP3G1F4ho70CsvLaXTew= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716826807; c=relaxed/simple; bh=paqah35wK7UHfAY+o4yWBNvGXjX05ZG0aeMp6H2T0EA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=PrnerLZB4LWV0MOWwUQfjwxFVzdyE00iQoker3Q9ISggoVSLq7wP4k7S08YWrEDlXLUu8viX3N+bxuB3fAjBvAKwvlGcHgGY2Py0o5wOtxbC5f6ggc3ZpBzXrboydUVR7N46uP3Yfd4Loep1soju7so9vMJKen7dXdqIZIZhDQ8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=Zp0ml6KC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="Zp0ml6KC" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1716826807; x=1748362807; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=paqah35wK7UHfAY+o4yWBNvGXjX05ZG0aeMp6H2T0EA=; b=Zp0ml6KCeWkefHEibnzKhgoZExzJV/ulaBxLll3PdIG+vahbbia10Zhz Hf1V2DOxonUJijNeudssIevxL/Lb8d28FS8JvvrQxRG17C7a09Bywsp/Q EWsp/bOI2PJlU05MBqh4EfBNFMgHDQUfa+UkENlB12YMQfaM6eFDqTsuj s2IbftkazV16C1aAkFlJMyZ+e2Zvv18JEXj2SfW5fpliIpXyXxF/73KQf oeXpEn1SMLtMGjzpAkL5UUkJ8Lfmo3O4NlED42leNEmqmnPCOQ+fq5dup hgZkZLaBQyrXg4IrMSlfDQJwLzh00M4PEWNK1KbtMrMWQ+/65+Vy0P12i Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: QfYEdCxcSJKsWJf1j9HowQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: YCklZfbESUapXIQVjtjMag== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11085"; a="16985954" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.08,193,1712646000"; d="scan'208";a="16985954" Received: from orviesa010.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.150]) by fmvoesa106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 May 2024 09:20:06 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: n+5S0vzIQuSjk2cw+zGw3g== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 4umqhQxHS5azjSuqDGBg7A== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.08,193,1712646000"; d="scan'208";a="34693426" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by orviesa010.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 May 2024 09:20:04 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1sBd4r-0000000BJrC-2qFO; Mon, 27 May 2024 19:20:01 +0300 Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 19:20:01 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Kent Gibson Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski , Linus Walleij , Bartosz Golaszewski , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH libgpiod v2 2/4] tools: tests: use "$@" instead of $* Message-ID: References: <20240527-fix-bash-tests-v2-0-05d90cea24cd@linaro.org> <20240527-fix-bash-tests-v2-2-05d90cea24cd@linaro.org> <20240527124420.GA108041@rigel> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240527124420.GA108041@rigel> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 08:44:20PM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote: > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 02:02:34PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: ... > It also doesn't like looping on find results in patch 4[2], though that > is not related to your change, so leave it and I'll fix it later? Does it really mean _to fix_ rather than _to "fix"_? I mean how do we know that shellcheck is 100% correct tool and has no bugs? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko