From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v5 4/4] umip_basic_test.c: improve kconfig verification to avoid umip wrong abort case
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 11:27:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200526092703.GC10775@dell5510> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200526092346.GB10775@dell5510>
Hi Xu,
> ...
> > > Thanks for a report and your effort to fix the problem. But this does not work,
> > > because current implementation does not support '|' as bitwise or, with this
> > > patch will result on tests being skipped for both cases.
> > CONFIG_A|CONFIG_B=y means CONGIG_A or CONGIG_B equal 'y', it will meet the
> > test condition. So it's as expected; only could not find CONFIG_A and
> > CONFIG_B equal to 'y', then it will not meet the test condition and exit.
> > It should be as expected.
> > Thank you for considering this patch again.
> Well, I understand your syntax, that you mean | as bitwise or :).
> But where did you find that this syntax is supported? Have a look in
> tst_kconfig_read() implementation (lib/tst_kconfig.c), there is nothing like
> this. And, indeed, if you test your patch on both CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP=y and
> CONFIG_X86_UMIP=y, it end up with:
> tst_kconfig.c:252: INFO: Missing kernel CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP|CONFIG_X86_UMIP=y
> tst_kconfig.c:284: CONF: Aborting due to unsuitable kernel config, see above!
> which confirm my statement there is no bitwise or support implemented :).
> Or am I missing something?
OK I now realized, that it's a 4th patch of patchset. I thought it's just single
patch, because the rest was rejected by Cyril:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/list/?series=149804&state=*
But it looks like Cyril is not against the implementation, it just needs to be
fixed:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/comment/2352151/
Kind regards,
Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-26 9:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-20 9:25 [LTP] [PATCH v5 1/4] lib/tst_kconfig.c: add any kconfig with or without expected value function Pengfei Xu
2019-12-20 9:25 ` [LTP] [PATCH v5 2/4] lib: add any kconfig with or without expected value into kconfig test Pengfei Xu
2019-12-20 9:25 ` [LTP] [PATCH v5 3/4] lib: add usage that any kconfig with or without expected value in document Pengfei Xu
2019-12-20 9:25 ` [LTP] [PATCH v5 4/4] umip_basic_test.c: improve kconfig verification to avoid umip wrong abort case Pengfei Xu
2020-05-25 21:24 ` Petr Vorel
2020-05-26 2:32 ` Pengfei Xu
2020-05-26 9:23 ` Petr Vorel
2020-05-26 9:27 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2020-05-26 10:07 ` Pengfei Xu
2020-05-26 10:11 ` Petr Vorel
2020-05-26 10:37 ` Pengfei Xu
2020-05-27 1:22 ` Xu, Pengfei
2020-05-27 6:26 ` Petr Vorel
2020-05-27 12:24 ` Xu, Pengfei
2020-01-29 16:19 ` [LTP] [PATCH v5 1/4] lib/tst_kconfig.c: add any kconfig with or without expected value function Cyril Hrubis
2020-01-30 10:00 ` Pengfei Xu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200526092703.GC10775@dell5510 \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox