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 7039DC433E0 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 20:09:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 201832098B for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 20:09:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="F1NFK1Is" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731156AbgFPUJZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 16:09:25 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59014 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727962AbgFPUJY (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 16:09:24 -0400 Received: from mail-vs1-xe42.google.com (mail-vs1-xe42.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e42]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1FBAC061573 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 13:09:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-xe42.google.com with SMTP id r11so30693vsj.5 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 13:09:24 -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=cVMWjFScpVollEOaNkFT8lSb179zymvf6bAuLU3nZ8g=; b=F1NFK1Isz0JIvcb9r87G9yspaDOOrupvCmuU/LAcJSn7u8WAmPr5qOibsWhJDSAbxP a3OFOdRsjDt2zI3ptL+pYtfB9xBHqQ1RomcjZJBHiFpqV62dqNSQeN2FOGXbOLTvpslr KCNa6gR+VdOLXF2ivweaOgfh0WnSXhr584BplLueb24vGG/nk7eyDGz3i5ki9iXSI1Zg xZbFe/s7r11uFZVsMNYZq2yn39WEI0gcZGvz1KdRR6uTNZ6mlayN+LdgQY5J+V/g/mjQ b0DqZJtwpP1nmW32d+jO9IpF0Efg54SkbLlgdjem9NxI8bUHZ1DE1hHii3bQPyE0J4BE fJFQ== 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=cVMWjFScpVollEOaNkFT8lSb179zymvf6bAuLU3nZ8g=; b=VIumRW9b/nmz99Fd8G5o53F1apIwXwEjneXUmeEAmJhGM/6wju7MSLeHt37q0UhwmI 8Xn7hMnqsfyreuxVU/wA80htCf3AEixVieb8jLSLa8XJ3niWbR6pkyp0ituR6rnmJrs9 n+vNjsW7j3SqSN4qPwoed0/APgOFwxss2ss5Lx7VDntnN6eNMTZ5NXyDT0CjOwBcpMqL Q6mITlaYAD5RQAa6jR0F9Z5Nq9SnSlkGQKL2dNZ/yy0mGi2e4A3rvzF+7M12myuO0h24 dOn0IrAWMDp0s9TaERJX2YxhnAKAf/O5fPp/3e8QFrrJD/NPJDqYG367XF4ACUB4m/N8 hvdg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531xQO/y5zc67HLwOE7h7Vz7zLmVx/BQGi2rebQit+GxHlInz6cc QMGHSe+FC3J158j2NPCdjPRbjMIBNXYtSNwm4ak= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw/4cuYPDUCD3Xns9GGeuzMZTuvKA8qrzsY4d6/0el53JdYE/CqpRJaf9WdfVmlQY8zIW6vIVR4Rh0gDJBoqcw= X-Received: by 2002:a67:3211:: with SMTP id y17mr3218081vsy.56.1592338163782; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 13:09:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200613155738.2249399-1-jim.cromie@gmail.com> <20200613155738.2249399-20-jim.cromie@gmail.com> <20200616115727.GN31238@alley> In-Reply-To: <20200616115727.GN31238@alley> From: jim.cromie@gmail.com Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 14:08:57 -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 On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:57 AM Petr Mladek wrote: > > On Sat 2020-06-13 09:57:33, Jim Cromie wrote: > > Current code expects "keyword" "arg" as 2 space separated words. > > Change to also accept "keyword:arg" and "keyword=arg" forms as well, > > and drop !(nwords%2) requirement. > > > > Then in rest of function, use new keyword,arg variables instead of > > word[i],word[i+1] > > I like the idea. But please allow only one form. IMHO, parameter=value > is a common way to pass values to commandline parameters. > I dont see a basis to prefer one over the other. we already now accept " file foo.c:func " that might argue for file=foo:func but file:foo:func is what youd expect reading left-to-right > Note that "keyword" and "arg" is strange naming, especially "arg". > I think keyword is clear in context. query_term is suitable, but no better. arg is pretty generic, without overloaded meaning like value ( like lvalue ? rvalue ?) almost as old as 'i', but generally a string (not an int) Is there an alternative you favor ? > Best Regards, > Petr