[RFC PATCH v1 15/21] test: hush: Fix instructions list tests for hush 2021.

[Francis Laniel]

This commit modifies the expected result for hush 2021.
Indeed, there were bugs in actual U-Boot hush which were fixed in upstream
Busybox.
As hush 2021 is based on upstream Busybox, these bugs no longer exist.

Signed-off-by: Francis Laniel <francis.lan...@amarulasolutions.com>
---
 test/hush/list.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+)

diff --git a/test/hush/list.c b/test/hush/list.c
index 052cf2783c..096bb4f034 100644
--- a/test/hush/list.c
+++ b/test/hush/list.c
@@ -50,8 +50,32 @@ static int hush_test_and_or(struct unit_test_state *uts)
 {
        /* A && B || C truth table. */
        ut_asserteq(1, run_command("false && false || false", 0));
+#ifdef CONFIG_HUSH_OLD_PARSER
        ut_asserteq(1, run_command("false && false || true", 0));
+#elif defined(CONFIG_HUSH_2021_PARSER)
+       /*
+        * This difference seems to come from a bug solved in Busybox hush.
+        *
+        * Indeed, the following expression can be seen like this:
+        * (false && false) || true
+        * So, (false && false) returns 1, the second false is not executed, and
+        * true is executed because of ||.
+        */
+       ut_assertok(run_command("false && false || true", 0));
+#endif  /* CONFIG_HUSH_2021_PARSER */
+#ifdef CONFIG_HUSH_OLD_PARSER
        ut_asserteq(1, run_command("false && true || true", 0));
+#elif defined(CONFIG_HUSH_2021_PARSER)
+       /*
+        * This difference seems to come from a bug solved in Busybox hush.
+        *
+        * Indeed, the following expression can be seen like this:
+        * (false && true) || true
+        * So, (false && true) returns 1, the true is not executed, and true is
+        * executed because of ||.
+        */
+       ut_assertok(run_command("false && true || true", 0));
+#endif  /* CONFIG_HUSH_2021_PARSER */
        ut_asserteq(1, run_command("false && true || false", 0));
        ut_assertok(run_command("true && true || false", 0));
        ut_asserteq(1, run_command("true && false || false", 0));
@@ -69,8 +93,32 @@ static int hush_test_or_and(struct unit_test_state *uts)
        ut_asserteq(1, run_command("false || false && true", 0));
        ut_assertok(run_command("false || true && true", 0));
        ut_asserteq(1, run_command("false || true && false", 0));
+#ifdef CONFIG_HUSH_OLD_PARSER
        ut_assertok(run_command("true || true && false", 0));
+#elif defined(CONFIG_HUSH_2021_PARSER)
+       /*
+        * This difference seems to come from a bug solved in Busybox hush.
+        *
+        * Indeed, the following expression can be seen like this:
+        * (true || true) && false
+        * So, (true || true) returns 0, the second true is not executed, and
+        * then false is executed because of &&.
+        */
+       ut_asserteq(1, run_command("true || true && false", 0));
+#endif  /* CONFIG_HUSH_2021_PARSER */
+#ifdef CONFIG_HUSH_OLD_PARSER
        ut_assertok(run_command("true || false && false", 0));
+#elif defined(CONFIG_HUSH_2021_PARSER)
+       /*
+        * This difference seems to come from a bug solved in Busybox hush.
+        *
+        * Indeed, the following expression can be seen like this:
+        * (true || false) && false
+        * So, (true || false) returns 0, the false is not executed, and then
+        * false is executed because of &&.
+        */
+       ut_asserteq(1, run_command("true || false && false", 0));
+#endif  /* CONFIG_HUSH_2021_PARSER */
        ut_assertok(run_command("true || false && true", 0));
        ut_assertok(run_command("true || true && true", 0));
 
-- 
2.25.1