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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5108C433DF for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:33:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7470121532 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:33:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="CC4Q7nmJ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726975AbgFQNdN (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2020 09:33:13 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50332 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726369AbgFQNdL (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2020 09:33:11 -0400 Received: from mail-vs1-xe43.google.com (mail-vs1-xe43.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e43]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 861E9C06174E for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 06:33:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-xe43.google.com with SMTP id c1so1356619vsc.11 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 06:33:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jTqaTkfBEJNdDtwOMT4r6+BJgXb7m5WLotnwfVqPg5s=; b=CC4Q7nmJnWLQT7rqxXtQyAge6sKG3krsrNAsBWHV7qNTGiCt+PrvXW4Thhago31Yi8 mXAWyZp6VrjLO+lZO0Xiss4zOcctQwZ98Ob6iEVwK3NgVJEu6hXyaD4z8+0hIIVucvfs Rb64c3hyuCYCNA2/WfE7y3VcoAxraae6uUTrqXQL8xfB29xUWuf1pkgyK9qDyxXZ1EWR sVakhNpT1DdVTmfU+LxdEFlLl02FVAKeAZri6Ub1icjUbV4eUZq/bw9wYX7Nj6g1Y5+J Mfez1mrnL43ahAFlfpcp5OD5bwc64e6y2xXMPiWc0GWo4wXioZOIzs+4yt1x8cr07Ot7 8xJQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jTqaTkfBEJNdDtwOMT4r6+BJgXb7m5WLotnwfVqPg5s=; b=dsan6Yyiluzcdnijromkr75zWxWerbjl5Z95cjgTENU7tnIIsKyzXdxO642IV56EEA rlsiqkzhOJPbZtNo/X6/3XMFd9Cs68MFPkNyI5fQEP1CiQRVyrC9z9YJGnLarebKPr+K Hcb3LDxTvpCmtJICdfupjmGqTgQGJpuPgop0vU8LuwKuZqSh16UeJ5sDD7Dgoh80WeUu RH9oO6xXWTE5rJ+GNeHEHeBHFsbQwO4aEvngyM3VQbcLn6fsRST8LqEEIm/c8VvL8AvN EtgmkgdjwL345IoN4Eh2q87EqdTwyozvUT6NqcmQFVlYYsIUchDkWGBUovXK2PoCKbO6 TyxA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Tq2ZPbwcA4TPkXKfGplY4kPdQRGVg9pUPqMDRzgiq1c0pTak0 dvn7zZRn5DXxHVgJ8BU3YAx2T8BkbBMjYizW54c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzivxNua6clGrscDh3vqjap3QKsvaZI38ohEIdwMwu8lcy9aTNCQ4nrIJ9sUaQsvB4IMxNxg4Tcyr2fyjKbduc= X-Received: by 2002:a67:c511:: with SMTP id e17mr5514458vsk.210.1592400790301; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 06:33:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200613155738.2249399-1-jim.cromie@gmail.com> <20200613155738.2249399-20-jim.cromie@gmail.com> <20200616115727.GN31238@alley> <20200617121156.GV31238@alley> In-Reply-To: <20200617121156.GV31238@alley> From: jim.cromie@gmail.com Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 07:32:44 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 19/24] dyndbg: accept query terms like module:foo and file=bar To: Petr Mladek Cc: Jason Baron , LKML , akpm@linuxfoundation.org, Greg KH , Rasmus Villemoes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org hi Petr > You made to do some research and I was wrong. For example, getopt() > operates with options and their arguments. So, 'keyword' and 'arg' names > look good after all. > > Well, I still think that only one syntax should be supported. And it > is better to distinguish keywords and arguments, so I prefer keyword=arg. > hehe, Im gonna cite some RFC wisdom to convince you ;-) Be strict in what you emit, and permissive in what you accept. I see no potential for real ambiguity that would override that bias. thanks jimc