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 7C853C83F2C for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 16:10:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id C22B23CEBFE for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 18:10:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (in-6.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.6]) (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 9F8B63CB68C for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 18:10:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1d]) (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-6.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A008140076D for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 18:10:23 +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 0F04D1F74B; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 16:10:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1693843823; 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=IQPgcknrFeW1EhVAohFx0loVuUpWk0iuFZ7nruoPnZU=; b=vhcl7BLAbQ/Z46pf4oWF4CPGZAOuibrIJCxtiSWpJLu7KVVeDaZeZvIkoOROic6kEi6B5e aiC98DaWdv25nBPVzjlJYItSWMrpQK4pguRQZqa7Q3pRsj/Tqakxx++JvQYd+HD98KKhDO kZQyDKPOTtK7/GYnL5ui1yLl0PTWoKE= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1693843823; 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=IQPgcknrFeW1EhVAohFx0loVuUpWk0iuFZ7nruoPnZU=; b=VvEo9TEBJ/+J60Wudod6d14NUBdcFOUMmWcAASPrxoa/HXq4xhweyZZlqtkaZdiz16kp7E ivyxJ4r9FCYiiUBw== 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 EDE9613425; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 16:10:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id GLvhOG4B9mRxYwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Mon, 04 Sep 2023 16:10:22 +0000 Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2023 18:11:02 +0200 From: Cyril Hrubis To: Marius Kittler Message-ID: References: <20230904145035.22939-1-mkittler@suse.de> <4508326.LvFx2qVVIh@linux-9lzf> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4508326.LvFx2qVVIh@linux-9lzf> X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.1 at in-6.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] Use correct ioctl request for termios 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: ltp 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! > But we have currently 4 tests that are all executed via both termio and > termios. To keep this kind of coverage we would need to duplicate all of those > lines. That would be 4 new test lines in total. Is that what you're > suggesting? I'm just asking twice because I'm not sure whether it is better > (but don't have a strong opinion). Yes, as far as I can tell one test per entry is much cleaner and easier to read. > By the way, how would I submit an amendment here? Just submit the amended > commit again in the same way (I used `git send-email -- > to=ltp@lists.linux.it`)? Yes, and you are supposed to version the commits, so add to format-patch -v2 for second version, etc. > And how is this merged? I saw that in another case patchwork was used? How > does that come into play? Things get merged by maintainers who apply the patch to their local git tree and then push to github. Patchwork is just a tool that monitors the mailing list and saves a list of patches that needs review, which makes things easier for developers as it's easy for patches to get burried in their mailboxes. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp