On 13 February 2018 at 11:09, Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 11:58:48AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 11:12 AM, Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Also remove redundant status checks of _scratch_mount. >> >> Is there any correlation between tests that need to use _scratch_mount_nocheck >> tests which _require_scratch_nocheck that could make some of these annotations >> automatic? > > No, they have totally different meanings. _require_scratch_nocheck means > don't do filesystem check after test, and _scratch_mount_nocheck means > don't check mount status. > > Perhaps it's just badly named, I can follow Andreas's suggestion to name > it as _try_scratch_mount or similar names. To me, "nocheck" tends to indicate that the result isn't checked because it doesn't matter, so _try_scratch_mount seems much better. Thanks, Andreas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
