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 526A8C54EE9 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 08:10:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CEAE3CAAEA for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:10:00 +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 4893E3C952D for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:09:49 +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 C09EF6000F6 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:09:48 +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 1104B5BFA7; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 08:09:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1663056588; h=from:from: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=mSjVIsbgXSxT8gQU028g9CZFk5+uGJlTwwqOg/IUjGY=; b=N5CIC6pxNxTApk9+faIyNAf/jFHg0HPQ6kFF8wD+beqJds+RV/gaOU+y1OPyQlNAO7NcXM h29UNPUT493F3y8Bu40/TlCfc7PEdcmoZxJBBk+KgSuHfEoeWnetSiD6eZoeMGteSHjmP7 G59YwaOcAgU/NsEv9e+exmtYQLQKwSs= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1663056588; h=from:from: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=mSjVIsbgXSxT8gQU028g9CZFk5+uGJlTwwqOg/IUjGY=; b=ScUBx7IG8aUUUpmS9yMyA/L1O/d/MN7+di1OhGJXADWNMkiL6LSk4hX4MEtvk24MUIh/uI r2wNX7hVlZE0KkCA== 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 F217913AB5; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 08:09:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id Rg2uOcs6IGNcEQAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 13 Sep 2022 08:09:47 +0000 Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:11:43 +0200 From: Cyril Hrubis To: Petr Vorel Message-ID: References: <20220909141840.18327-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20220909141840.18327-4-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 v5 03/10] tst_supported_fs: Print TCONF if no filesystem supported 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: , Cc: Richard Palethorpe , 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! > > Shouldn't we rather than this add tst_res(TCONF, "...") messages to the > > lib/tst_supported_fs_types.c so that we get consistent messages between > > C and shell? > > Well, in v4 I add TCONF in tst_fs_is_supported_skiplist() > (lib/tst_supported_fs_types.c), but you asked for TST_FS_UNSUPPORTED [1]. I guess that we misunderstand each other. I'm fine with the library printing messages, what I didn't like was the tst_brk() which made the whole program execution flow obscured. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp