[PATCH] acpi: checksum: rename the test name from "checksum to "acpichecksum"

[Colin Ian King]

On 25/04/13 03:43, Alex Hung wrote:
> The name "checksum" is too generic. The rename can help a user to understand
> that the test targets ACPI tables and verifies the table checksum.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Hung <alex.hung at canonical.com>
> ---
>   src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c |   19 ++++++++++---------
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c b/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c
> index e56ca66..a8ec15c 100644
> --- a/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c
> +++ b/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c
> @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
>
>   #include "fwts.h"
>
> -static void checksum_rsdp(fwts_framework *fw, fwts_acpi_table_info *table)
> +static void acpi_checksum_rsdp(fwts_framework *fw, fwts_acpi_table_info *table)
>   {
>   	uint8_t checksum;
>   	fwts_acpi_table_rsdp *rsdp = (fwts_acpi_table_rsdp*)table->data;
> @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ static void checksum_rsdp(fwts_framework *fw, fwts_acpi_table_info *table)
>
>   }
>
> -static int checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw)
> +static int acpi_checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw)
>   {
>   	int i;
>
> @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static int checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw)
>   		hdr = (fwts_acpi_table_header*)table->data;
>
>   		if (strcmp("RSDP", table->name) == 0) {
> -			checksum_rsdp(fw, table);
> +			acpi_checksum_rsdp(fw, table);
>   			continue;
>   		}
>
> @@ -140,19 +140,20 @@ static int checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw)
>   	return FWTS_OK;
>   }
>
> -static int checksum_test1(fwts_framework *fw)
> +static int acpi_checksum_test1(fwts_framework *fw)
>   {
> -	return checksum_scan_tables(fw);
> +	return acpi_checksum_scan_tables(fw);
>   }
>
> -static fwts_framework_minor_test checksum_tests[] = {
> -	{ checksum_test1, "Check ACPI table checksums." },
> +static fwts_framework_minor_test acpi_checksum_tests[] = {
> +	{ acpi_checksum_test1, "Check ACPI table checksums." },
>   	{ NULL, NULL }
>   };
>
>   static fwts_framework_ops checksum_ops = {
>   	.description = "Check ACPI table checksum.",
> -	.minor_tests = checksum_tests
> +	.minor_tests = acpi_checksum_tests
>   };
>
> -FWTS_REGISTER("checksum", &checksum_ops, FWTS_TEST_ANYTIME, FWTS_FLAG_BATCH);
> +FWTS_REGISTER("acpichecksum", &checksum_ops,
> +		FWTS_TEST_ANYTIME, FWTS_FLAG_BATCH);
>

I've been thinking about this all day.  Indeed it is a good idea for us 
to name the tests in a meaningful way but we also need to consider 
ensuring we don't cause too much pain for users who are used to the 
current test naming scheme.

I think that we should re-examine all the current tests and see if any 
more require renaming and *then* apply these changes in one go rather 
than making the changes in a piecemeal fashion.

+1 for renaming this test, but also:
1)  We need the fwts-test renamed
2)  Can this wait until we have re-examined all the current test names.

Colin