On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:59:28PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:19 PM Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 04:11:51PM -0300, Vitor Massaru Iha wrote:
...
lib/{test_sort.c => sort_kunit.c} | 31 +++++++++++++++----------------
Still opened question why kunit is a suffix? Can't we leave same name? Can't we do it rather prefix?
Sorry to jump in now; I thought Vitor's reply with a link to the new proposed documentation[1] addressed this. The naming convention issue came up about a month ago[2]. The people in the discussion (including myself) came to an agreement on _kunit.c. That being said, the documentation hasn't been accepted yet, so if you really feel strongly about it, now is the time to change it.
My argument is to do something like
- ls .../test* vs. ls .../*_kunit.c
- use shell completion vs. no completion when looking if there is a test module for something
But I agree that this is matter of style.
All that being said, I would rather not discuss that issue here for the benefit of the participants in the preceding discussions.
I posted lore links for the relevant threads, which should be easy enough to In-Reply-To your way into. Nevertheless, if it makes it easier, let me know and I can CC you into the discussions.
No need. I think you have enough clever folks and good ideas behind this. Just put a reference to all these conversion patches to the summary of pros and cons of renaming.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20200620054944.167330-1-davidgow@goo... [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/202006141005.BA19A9D3@keescook/t/#u