[LTP] [PATCH v5 4/4] umip_basic_test.c: improve kconfig verification to avoid umip wrong abort case

[Petr Vorel]

Hi Pengfei,

> > But it looks like Cyril is not against the implementation, it just needs to be
> > fixed:
> > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/comment/2352151/

> You are right, actually it could be worked as my suggest way:
> "CONFIG_A|CONFIG_B=Y".
> I tried to use Cyril's advice "CONFIG_A=X|CONFIG_B=Y" way, which will
> add more code complexity, so I just want to solve the problem I am currently
> facing.
> If we really need the "CONFIG_A=X|CONFIG_B=Y" function, which cannot be
> satisfied by "CONFIG_A|CONFIG_B=Y" function in the future, then we could add
> this function I think.
> Thanks for your considering.

I'd also think that we need "CONFIG_A=X|CONFIG_B=Y", because
"CONFIG_A|CONFIG_B=Y" is ambiguous (we support both CONFIG_FOO and
CONFIG_FOO=bar and this must stay even with |).

Will you send a patch for that or shell I fix it with LINUX_VERSION_CODE <
KERNEL_VERSION for now?

Kind regards,
Petr