[LTP] [PATCH v4 4/4] lib: add any kconfig to match the expected value function document

[Yang Xu]

Hi Pengfei
> Hi Xu,
> 
> 
> On 2019-12-20 at 13:37:21 +0800, Yang Xu wrote:
>>
>> Hi Pengfei
>>
>> on 2019/12/19 21:18, Pengfei Xu wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>    doc/test-writing-guidelines.txt | 4 +++-
>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/doc/test-writing-guidelines.txt b/doc/test-writing-guidelines.txt
>>> index 79d857fea..e64ff8716 100644
>>> --- a/doc/test-writing-guidelines.txt
>>> +++ b/doc/test-writing-guidelines.txt
>>> @@ -1590,7 +1590,9 @@ aborted with 'TCONF' if any of the required options were not set.
>> Before your patch, I know we can use the following two formats kconfigs
>> CONFIG_A
>> CONFIG_A=y/m/v
>> after your patch set, we can use the following three formats kconfigs
>> CONFIG_A
>> CONFIG_A=y/m/v
>> CONFIG_A|CONFIGB=y/m/v
>> As the usual extend logic,  we think  CONFIGA|CONFIGB is also ok. But in
>> fact, we use "|" or "=" to delim string. So  we can't parse CONFIGA|CONFIGB
>> correctly. So, if we can tell user or developer about this in here, it will
>> be better.
>>
>> ps: we can add configA| config B test in your third patch.
>>
>    Actually present patch could support CONFIG_A|CONFIG_B style, and it works
> well, you could change "CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP|CONFIG_X86_UMIP=y" to
> "CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP|CONFIG_X86_UMIP" in test_kconfig.c and have a try. : )
"CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP|CONFIG_X86_UMIP" is useful because 
CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP is in our kernel configs . If you use 
"CONFIG_X86_UMIP|CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP", it will report error.

Kind Regards
Yang Xu
> 
> Thanks!
>> Kind Regards
>> Yang Xu
>>>    #include "tst_test.h"
>>>    static const char *kconfigs[] = {
>>> -	"CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP",
>>> +	"CONFIG_EXT4_FS=y",
>>> +	"CONFIG_MMU",
>>> +	"CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP|CONFIG_X86_UMIP=y",
>>>    	NULL
>>>    };
>>>
>>
>>
> 
>