From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cyril Hrubis Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:36:15 +0200 Subject: [LTP] Rename tst_test_* to tst_require_* In-Reply-To: <20191011100604.GA11441@dell5510> References: <20191011090737.17997-1-lkml@jv-coder.de> <20191011100604.GA11441@dell5510> Message-ID: <20191011123614.GD2591@rei> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it Hi! > > these patches rename tst_test_* to tst_require_*, to better describe > > their use. There is also tst_require_root, that has the same > > behavior: It also calls tst_brk in case of a failing requirement. > > > You can also get this patch from the following repo: > > https://github.com/MofX/ltp/commits/rename_tst_test-tst_require > > sorry for not thinking first, I wonder if we want to sync > tst_test_* (function name) vs $TST_NEEDS_* (test API variable name), > e.g.: tst_require_drivers $TST_NEEDS_DRIVERS > > i.e. either of these: > s/tst_test_/tst_needs_/ > s/TST_NEEDS_/TST_REQUIRE_/ I guess that I started bike-shedding here, I should have been silent I guess... I do consider this names to mean something different in the contexts, i.e. "needs" is something that is expressed in metadata, while "require" is part of a function name. But hey I'm by no means native speaker, so who know, and also I would prefer to work on the actual code, which is more fruitful than API renames. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz