[PATCH 5/5] ntoskrnl/tests: Use a more descriptive name for the netio test driver.

[Alexandre Julliard]

Paul Gofman <pgofman at codeweavers.com> writes:

> On 4/7/21 06:41, Zebediah Figura (she/her) wrote:
>> On 4/5/21 4:10 AM, Paul Gofman wrote:
>>> FWIW the idea was not to have this test driver specific to netio but
>>> rather for the tests which require Windows 7+ to load (or test the
>>> functionality present on newer Windows only to avoid extra checks for
>>> keeping compatibility with earlier versions).
>>>
>>
>> I guess the patch has already been committed, but I'd offer as a weak
>> counterpoint that it probably makes sense to separate netio tests
>> semantically from others. Or, if not, that this test unit can be
>> renamed again ("driver_win7"?) if it ever becomes useful to add other
>> tests here. I don't feel particularly strongly though.
>>
> Do you see any reason why netio deserves a separate driver module? E.
> g., if we come to adding WdfLdr, why not to link it and put the tests to
> the same test driver? Anyway, now there are netio tests only, that can
> probably be thought of once anyone decides to add some new Win7+
> specific tests.

In general, grouping things based on the Windows version is not a good
idea. They should be put together when they are semantically related.

The version that some API requires is not an important detail, and not
something that will help make sense of the code structure. That's
particularly true since pre-win7 will soon be irrelevant, so every new
test would then go into the driver_win7 file. That wouldn't be very
helpful.

That doesn't mean we can't put other related things in driver_netio, and
rename it if necessary. But two tests shouldn't be considered related
just because they both happen to require win7.

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.org