* [LTP] [RFC] testcases: unify naming for syscall tests ending in digits
@ 2026-04-30 15:09 Jinseok Kim
2026-05-04 8:31 ` Cyril Hrubis
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jinseok Kim @ 2026-04-30 15:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp
Hi All,
I noticed both styles are used for tests of syscalls ending in digits:
For example:
dup2/dup201.c
dup3/dup3_01.c
Would it be better to unify them as dup2_01.c / dup3_01.c for consistency?
Thanks.
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [LTP] [RFC] testcases: unify naming for syscall tests ending in digits
2026-04-30 15:09 [LTP] [RFC] testcases: unify naming for syscall tests ending in digits Jinseok Kim
@ 2026-05-04 8:31 ` Cyril Hrubis
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Cyril Hrubis @ 2026-05-04 8:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jinseok Kim; +Cc: ltp
Hi!
> I noticed both styles are used for tests of syscalls ending in digits:
>
> For example:
> dup2/dup201.c
> dup3/dup3_01.c
>
> Would it be better to unify them as dup2_01.c / dup3_01.c for consistency?
It makes sense to unify, I'm not sure if it should be dup201.c and
dup301.c or dup2_01.c and dup3_02.c.
If we want to keep the naming consistent with the rest of LTP we should
probably go for dup201.c and dup301.c but it's a bit less readable than
the underscore variant.
Does anyone else has an opinion here?
--
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-05-04 8:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-04-30 15:09 [LTP] [RFC] testcases: unify naming for syscall tests ending in digits Jinseok Kim
2026-05-04 8:31 ` Cyril Hrubis
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox