Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[SVE] Test_TC_CADMIN_1_16.yaml makes assumptions not supported by the spec #11

Closed
raju-apple opened this issue Oct 19, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels

Comments

@raju-apple
Copy link

From chip-test-scripts created by bzbarsky-apple: CHIP-Specifications/chip-test-scripts#666

Description:

See project-chip/connectedhomeip#29375

The test expects fabric info entries to come in a particular order, but the spec does not require that.

@raju-apple
Copy link
Author

I understand the specification doesn't mandate the order or fabric list. But the YAML has no support for verifying list values regardless of order, I have already raised an SDK issue seeking the support for the same 24149.

Until we wait for the SDK team to come back, Only option for YAML script i can think of is, we may read the Fabrics attribute without response check and with a prompt we could ask the user to check whether the values of the Fabric list CONTAINS only Fabric-index values 1, 3, 4.
@bzbarsky-apple What is your thoughts on this?

@raju-apple
Copy link
Author

@manjunath-grl project-chip/connectedhomeip#29643 should make it so you can use contains and excludes on lists of structs. Note that project-chip/connectedhomeip#24149 is about a completely different situation that has nothing to do with this one...

With the PR above, I guess you can have something like:

    contains: [ entries here]
    maxLength: length-of-entries # To make sure there's nothing extra in the list

or so.

@manjunath-grl
Copy link
Collaborator

@raju-apple Fixed in PR 29883 please verify it and close the ticket.

@Apollon77
Copy link

Apollon77 commented Jan 20, 2024

Also verified. Works. Thank you

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants