Re: [PATCH v1 1/9] selftests: Line buffer test program's stdout

[Mark Brown]

On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 03:32:19PM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> On 13/07/2023 15:16, Mark Brown wrote:

> > so that if setbuf
> > isn't installed on the target system or the tests are run standalone we
> > don't run into issues there.  Even if the test isn't corrupting data
> > having things unbuffered is going to be good for making sure we don't
> > drop any output if the test dies.

> Note that currently I've set stdbuf to encourage line buffering rather than no
> buffering. Are you saying no buffering is preferred? I took the view that line
> buffering is a good middle ground, and and aligns with what people see when
> developing and running the program manually in the terminal.

TBH with the way KTAP is specified line buffered and unbuffered are
probably equivalent, I was just defaulting to unbuffered since it's the
more conservative (if less performant for lots of I/O) option.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature