Yes, this looks sensible.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Wood [mailto:thomas.w...@intel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 11:58 AM
> To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Gore, Tim; daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch
> Subject: [PATCH i-g-t 7/8] lib: always warn about unknown options
>
> All tests can now register extra options, so there should not be any unknown
> options.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Wood <thomas.w...@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tim Gore <tim.g...@intel.com>
> ---
> lib/igt_core.c | 27 ++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/igt_core.c b/lib/igt_core.c index 0867c27..42b22fc 100644
> --- a/lib/igt_core.c
> +++ b/lib/igt_core.c
> @@ -362,17 +362,9 @@ static int common_init(int argc, char **argv,
> ret = -1;
> goto out;
> case '?':
> - if (opterr) {
> - print_usage(command_str, help_str, true);
> - ret = -2;
> - goto out;
> - }
> - /*
> - * Just ignore the error, since the unknown argument
> - * can be something the caller understands and will
> - * parse by doing a second getopt scanning.
> - */
> - break;
> + print_usage(command_str, help_str, true);
> + ret = -2;
> + goto out;
> default:
> ret = extra_opt_handler(c, option_index);
> if (ret)
> @@ -475,18 +467,7 @@ void igt_subtest_init(int argc, char **argv)
> */
> void igt_simple_init(int argc, char **argv) {
> - int ret;
> -
> - /* supress getopt errors about unknown options */
> - opterr = 0;
> -
> - ret = common_init(argc, argv, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - /* exit with no error for -h/--help */
> - exit(ret == -1 ? 0 : ret);
> -
> - /* reset opt parsing */
> - optind = 1;
> + common_init(argc, argv, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> }
>
> /**
> --
> 1.9.3
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
