TC-RR-1.1: Fix for pre-existing fabric removal #32921
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This test assumed that the client ordering matched to the ordering
of the fabric table, but this is not the case if there is a fabric
on the device before the test starts. In this case, the initial
fabric is in table slot 1 with index 1, the test starts in table
slot 2, with fabric index 2. Then the initial fabric is removed
from table slot 1, and the test adds a new fabric. The new fabric
is allocated fabric index 3, but appears in slot 1 in the table,
and the order between the controllers and the fabric table as read
off the device is now out of sync.
Instead, name the controllers based on the fabric index rather
than the index in the fabric table.
TEST: commissioned all-clusters using chip-tool then ran RR-1.1.
Test now passes, whereas before there was a failure.
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
andy31415,
andyg-apple,
anush-apple,
arkq,
bzbarsky-apple,
carol-apple,
chrisdecenzo,
chshu,
chulspro,
cliffamzn,
Damian-Nordic,
dhrishi,
harimau-qirex,
harsha-rajendran,
hawk248,
hicklin,
jepenven-silabs,
jmartinez-silabs,
jmeg-sfy,
joonhaengHeo,
jtung-apple,
kkasperczyk-no,
kpschoedel,
ksperling-apple,
lazarkov,
lpbeliveau-silabs,
LuDuda and
mhazley
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
tecimovic,
tehampson,
woody-apple,
tima-q,
younghak-hwang,
tobiasgraf,
turon,
yufengwangca,
vivien-apple and
wiba-nordic
|
PR #32921: Size comparison from d7dde9b to 3e5a743 Decreases (3 builds for efr32)
Full report (71 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
|
andy31415
reviewed
Apr 10, 2024
andy31415
reviewed
Apr 10, 2024
andy31415
reviewed
Apr 10, 2024
Co-authored-by: Andrei Litvin <andy314@gmail.com>
cecille
commented
Apr 11, 2024
|
PR #32921: Size comparison from d7dde9b to 8582eac Increases above 0.2%:
Increases (68 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
Decreases (12 builds for efr32, linux, nrfconnect, telink)
Full report (70 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
|
andy31415
approved these changes
Apr 15, 2024
cecille
added a commit
to cecille/connectedhomeip
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2024
* TC-RR-1.1: Fix for pre-existing fabric removal
This test assumed that the client ordering matched to the ordering
of the fabric table, but this is not the case if there is a fabric
on the device before the test starts. In this case, the initial
fabric is in table slot 1 with index 1, the test starts in table
slot 2, with fabric index 2. Then the initial fabric is removed
from table slot 1, and the test adds a new fabric. The new fabric
is allocated fabric index 3, but appears in slot 1 in the table,
and the order between the controllers and the fabric table as read
off the device is now out of sync.
Instead, name the controllers based on the fabric index rather
than the index in the fabric table.
TEST: commissioned all-clusters using chip-tool then ran RR-1.1.
Test now passes, whereas before there was a failure.
* Update src/python_testing/TC_RR_1_1.py
Co-authored-by: Andrei Litvin <andy314@gmail.com>
* Update src/python_testing/TC_RR_1_1.py
* Address review comments, fix
---------
Co-authored-by: Andrei Litvin <andy314@gmail.com>
andy31415
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2024
* TC-RR-1.1: Fix for pre-existing fabric removal
This test assumed that the client ordering matched to the ordering
of the fabric table, but this is not the case if there is a fabric
on the device before the test starts. In this case, the initial
fabric is in table slot 1 with index 1, the test starts in table
slot 2, with fabric index 2. Then the initial fabric is removed
from table slot 1, and the test adds a new fabric. The new fabric
is allocated fabric index 3, but appears in slot 1 in the table,
and the order between the controllers and the fabric table as read
off the device is now out of sync.
Instead, name the controllers based on the fabric index rather
than the index in the fabric table.
TEST: commissioned all-clusters using chip-tool then ran RR-1.1.
Test now passes, whereas before there was a failure.
* Update src/python_testing/TC_RR_1_1.py
* Update src/python_testing/TC_RR_1_1.py
* Address review comments, fix
---------
Co-authored-by: Andrei Litvin <andy314@gmail.com>
raju-apple
pushed a commit
to raju-apple/connectedhomeip
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 5, 2024
* TC-RR-1.1: Fix for pre-existing fabric removal
This test assumed that the client ordering matched to the ordering
of the fabric table, but this is not the case if there is a fabric
on the device before the test starts. In this case, the initial
fabric is in table slot 1 with index 1, the test starts in table
slot 2, with fabric index 2. Then the initial fabric is removed
from table slot 1, and the test adds a new fabric. The new fabric
is allocated fabric index 3, but appears in slot 1 in the table,
and the order between the controllers and the fabric table as read
off the device is now out of sync.
Instead, name the controllers based on the fabric index rather
than the index in the fabric table.
TEST: commissioned all-clusters using chip-tool then ran RR-1.1.
Test now passes, whereas before there was a failure.
* Update src/python_testing/TC_RR_1_1.py
Co-authored-by: Andrei Litvin <andy314@gmail.com>
* Update src/python_testing/TC_RR_1_1.py
* Address review comments, fix
---------
Co-authored-by: Andrei Litvin <andy314@gmail.com>
andy31415
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 6, 2024
* TC-SC-3.6: Add precondition to remove extra fabrics (#33503) * TC-SC-3.6: Add precondition to remove extra fabrics Before commissioning the other fabrics, remove pre-existing fabrics from the device because the TH does not have the ability to check for subscriptions from them. Note that this change means that any pre-exisiting fabrics on the device WILL NOT BE THERE after this test. This is the same behaviour as in RR-1.1. Test: Tested against all-clusters app. chip-tool pairing onnetwork-long 0x12344321 20202021 3840 chip-tool pairing open-commissioning-window 0x12344321 0 900 10000 3840 python src/python_testing/TC_SC_3_6.py --commissioning-method on-network \ --discriminator 3840 --passcode 20202021 Results (only relevant logs): [MatterTest] 05-17 07:54:32.981 INFO Pre-condition: Remove all pre-existing fabrics on the device that do not belong to the TH ... [MatterTest] 05-17 07:54:32.994 INFO Removing extra fabric at 1 from device. ... INFO:root:Final result: PASS ! * add missing import * TC-RR-1.1: Fix for pre-existing fabric removal (#32921) * TC-RR-1.1: Fix for pre-existing fabric removal This test assumed that the client ordering matched to the ordering of the fabric table, but this is not the case if there is a fabric on the device before the test starts. In this case, the initial fabric is in table slot 1 with index 1, the test starts in table slot 2, with fabric index 2. Then the initial fabric is removed from table slot 1, and the test adds a new fabric. The new fabric is allocated fabric index 3, but appears in slot 1 in the table, and the order between the controllers and the fabric table as read off the device is now out of sync. Instead, name the controllers based on the fabric index rather than the index in the fabric table. TEST: commissioned all-clusters using chip-tool then ran RR-1.1. Test now passes, whereas before there was a failure. * Update src/python_testing/TC_RR_1_1.py Co-authored-by: Andrei Litvin <andy314@gmail.com> * Update src/python_testing/TC_RR_1_1.py * Address review comments, fix --------- Co-authored-by: Andrei Litvin <andy314@gmail.com> * TC-OPCREDS-3.7: support DUTs with existing fabrics (#33511) * TC-OPCREDS-3.7: support DUTs with existing fabrics * Restyled by prettier-yaml --------- Co-authored-by: Restyled.io <commits@restyled.io> --------- Co-authored-by: C Freeman <cecille@google.com> Co-authored-by: Andrei Litvin <andy314@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Restyled.io <commits@restyled.io>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This test assumed that the client ordering matched to the ordering of the fabric table, but this is not the case if there is a fabric on the device before the test starts. In this case, the initial fabric is in table slot 1 with index 1, the test starts in table slot 2, with fabric index 2. Then the initial fabric is removed from table slot 1, and the test adds a new fabric. The new fabric is allocated fabric index 3, but appears in slot 1 in the table, and the order between the controllers and the fabric table as read off the device is now out of sync.
Instead, name the controllers based on the fabric index rather than the index in the fabric table.
TEST: commissioned all-clusters using chip-tool then ran RR-1.1.
Test now passes, whereas before there was a failure.