Fix #1135, add bitmask assert macros

[jphickey]

Describe the contribution
Add a pair of macros that can confirm a value has bits set or does not have bits set. By using bitmask-aware macros, the logged
information can include both the raw/actual value as well as the specific bits being tested.

Fixes #1135

Testing performed
Build and run all tests

Expected behavior changes
None here, just adds new macros

System(s) tested on
Ubuntu

Additional context
Tested by updating the new time clock state checks to use this macro. Looks a little something like this in the log:

[BEGIN] 94 Test Clock
[ INFO] time_current_test.c:126:Testing: CFE_TIME_GetClockState, CFE_TIME_GetClockInfo
[ PASS] 94.001 time_current_test.c:145 - CFE_TIME_GetClockInfo() (0x33e0) &~ CFE_TIME_FLAG_CLKSET (0x8000)
[ PASS] 94.002 time_current_test.c:148 - CFE_TIME_GetClockInfo() (0x33e0) & CFE_TIME_FLAG_SRCINT (0x2000)
[ PASS] 94.003 time_current_test.c:149 - CFE_TIME_GetClockInfo() (0x33e0) & CFE_TIME_FLAG_SIGPRI (0x1000)
[ PASS] 94.004 time_current_test.c:150 - CFE_TIME_GetClockInfo() (0x33e0) &~ CFE_TIME_FLAG_REFERR (0x10)
[ PASS] 94.005 time_current_test.c:151 - CFE_TIME_GetClockInfo() (0x33e0) &~ CFE_TIME_FLAG_UNUSED (0xf)
[  END] 94 Test Clock           TOTAL::5     PASS::5     FAIL::0     MIR::0     TSF::0     TTF::0     WARN::0

Contributor Info - All information REQUIRED for consideration of pull request
Joseph Hickey, Vantage Systems, Inc.

[jphickey]

Also note, although this could have been done only in the macro, such an implementation would still use == in the log (not really correct) and it would have evaluated the "mask" argument twice (not good, cannot be a function call or value with side effects). So this proposes adding a new comparison type enum instead, and thus the macro only evaluates arguments once, and we can use a more correct operator in the log (&/&~) so its clear we are not checking for equality here.

[astrogeco]

CCB:2021-09-01 APPROVED