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 645BCC433F5 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 17:24:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 990EE3C9B3D for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 18:24:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (in-7.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.7]) (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 picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 406D93C071A for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 18:24:00 +0100 (CET) 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-7.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D860200BCA for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 18:23:59 +0100 (CET) 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 996AD1F383; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 17:23:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1644341038; 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=1u+6z6yrgdIdIDBu9RT5X7g6VnS+DxeSfcG4TAkX0rw=; b=juNAhcagWXee0uANF+nrNt7Ci3EPNwVFT9QUFe6+kUfwhzMAidXgvlnhCZ9xBiQU3iJsA5 VDcVAUhE/khhBOkHt1Y5vgiICUUlHUWGzHZ7z/UsufoEYhH7CYijOzTbppdLMwrp/s/RmT YrTY7cm0PObs/u1xT92a4O8ssHdGwo8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1644341038; 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=1u+6z6yrgdIdIDBu9RT5X7g6VnS+DxeSfcG4TAkX0rw=; b=P67ZxltmaERF+GTwk1JIITMcVe/pz99wnN/hZxZ/iYmbx9HtEaMRKte1BXXs5mWzt0rGhw RGYvjoblNuSqUhCg== 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 6436D13CF5; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 17:23:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id BiSGFi6nAmKrYgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 08 Feb 2022 17:23:58 +0000 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 18:23:56 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Cyril Hrubis Message-ID: References: <20220126141152.6428-1-pvorel@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-7.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/1] lib: Rename array used for .all_filesystems flag 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@lists.linux.it 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! > > > I guess that fs_type_whitelist[] may be confusing but all_filesystems[] > > > is IMHO not that much better since we use that a as base for the > > > all_filesystem before we filter out these that are not supported. Maybe > > > we should call it try_filesystems[] instead? > > Well, how I understand it the main feature is to be for .all_filesystems. And > > items of this array can be whitelisted. Thus try_filesystems does not evoke much > > to me that it's for all_filesystems. > > I considered to have array all_filesystems[] and .fs_type_whitelist pointer to > > that array, but having pointer just to document things is bad idea. > The reason why I do not think it's reasonable to name the array > all_filesystems is that setting the .all_filesystems flag does not mean > that the test would be run over all these filesytems. We just silently > skip these that are not supported... Understand. Also try_filesystems is certainly better than fs_type_whitelist. How about default_all_filesystems or just default_filesystems? Regardless we rename it or not, at least the comment I put in the patchset would improve things (although you may phrase it better). Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp