[PCICClient] Test coverage is lacking

[theseankelly]

Test coverage on the PCICClient module needs improvement.

Some ideas for enhanced coverage are below. This is not intended to be a test specification but some ideas to get the ball rolling.

• Test the critical section in ifm3d::PCICClient::Impl::Call which prevents concurrent PCIC transactions to the device. With and without response. (could have caught [PCICClient] Mutex guarding overlapped Call is mistakenly released by a wait on condition_variable #244)
• Positive and negative test cases for each overload of each API surface
  • for example, test how we handle a user-specified timeout that's unreasonably small (could have caught issues like [PCICClient] User-specified timeout puts PCICClient object in an invalid state #246)
• Tests for timeouts both on call (perhaps calling invalid IP?) and response (expect a response on a command that doesn't provide one and time out)? (could have caught [PCICClient] std::condition_variables must be waited with predicate #243, [PCICClient] Call overload with timeout has misleading timeout semantics and can block #245)
• re-entrancy (calling Call from within the results callback) -- not sure we want to support this, but nothing is stopping it and it's untested.
• sending invalid commands (both with and without response expected, with and without timeout)

[github-actions]

This issue is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity.

[github-actions]

This issue was closed because it has been inactive for 14 days since being marked as stale.