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

refactor(config_test): Added the test_app for various configurations (part 2/2) #111

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

roma-jam
Copy link
Collaborator

@roma-jam roma-jam commented Jan 6, 2025

Description

Split the test application for cdc and disconnection verification.

Part2/2: Added the test_app for tinyusb various configurations

Related

Testing

  • Added a test for various tinyusb configurations (FS/HS)

Checklist

Before submitting a Pull Request, please ensure the following:

  • 🚨 This PR does not introduce breaking changes.
  • All CI checks (GH Actions) pass.
  • Documentation is updated as needed.
  • Tests are updated or added as necessary.
  • Code is well-commented, especially in complex areas.
  • Git history is clean — commits are squashed to the minimum necessary.

@roma-jam roma-jam added this to the esp_tinyusb v1.7.0 milestone Jan 6, 2025
@roma-jam roma-jam self-assigned this Jan 6, 2025
@roma-jam roma-jam changed the title refactor(config_test): Added the test_app for tinyusb various configurations (part 2/2) refactor(config_test): Added the test_app for various configurations (part 2/2) Jan 6, 2025
@roma-jam roma-jam force-pushed the feature/dconn_detection_test branch from 0726ee3 to db62192 Compare January 6, 2025 12:19
@roma-jam roma-jam force-pushed the refactor/add_config_test branch from c6d9052 to 73ea243 Compare January 6, 2025 12:36
@roma-jam roma-jam changed the base branch from feature/dconn_detection_test to master January 6, 2025 12:36
@roma-jam roma-jam force-pushed the refactor/add_config_test branch 3 times, most recently from de1a18b to 3345b90 Compare January 7, 2025 09:08
@roma-jam roma-jam marked this pull request as ready for review January 7, 2025 10:12
Copy link
Collaborator

@peter-marcisovsky peter-marcisovsky left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Leaving some comments

@roma-jam roma-jam force-pushed the refactor/add_config_test branch from 1bba7a2 to 2ed1169 Compare January 7, 2025 12:14
Copy link
Collaborator

@peter-marcisovsky peter-marcisovsky left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thx for the update

* - HS configuration descriptor is not provided by user (legacy compatibility) and default HS config descriptor is using when possible.
* - Qualifier descriptor.
*/
TEST_CASE("descriptors_config_device_and_config", "[esp_tinyusb][usb_device][config]")
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test fails on S3 and Win10 host. Could you please double check?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is really strange.
Can you describe exactly please, how it fails?

__test_tinyusb_set_config(&tusb_cfg);
}

#if (TUD_OPT_HIGH_SPEED)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For future: We will run this test on P4 for both FS and HS configurations, so we might have to update this #ifdefs

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Anyway, I will need to update this test during the run-time configuration.
Maybe after run-time will be available, we can provide an error for unsupported configurations.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In that case, maybe it is not that important to add these tests right now.

@tore-espressif, WDYT about moving them to the release, when we will add run-time configuration?
Does it make sense to you?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants