(Resent in plaintext mode) Hi Luiz: I have fixed the mgmt-tester on the bluez side. The "Read Exp Feature - Success" test passed on my local test setup. Please let me know if there are any issues. Thanks and regards, Joseph On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 1:27 PM Joseph Hwang <josephsih@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Luiz: > > The mgmt-tester change to add the UUID of the new exp feature is just > sent for review: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/patch/20210820131751.BlueZ.v1.1.I165b6fc2b20d80c8d18946434005f0269d92f489@changeid/ > > The tester checks the exp features UUIDs and FLAGs. As the FLAG > values depend on how the test is set up. I set the flags to be all > 0x00 which passed the mgmt-tester in my local test setup. If that is > not the case upstream, please let me know. > > Thanks and regards, > Joseph > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 2:04 AM Luiz Augusto von Dentz > <luiz.dentz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi Joseph, > > > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 10:49 PM Joseph Hwang <josephsih@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Luiz: > > > > > > I am wondering if it is possible to merge these kernel patches > > > before fixing the mgmt-tester? > > > > > > The mgmt-tester failed due to its checking against the fixed exp > > > feature count and the corresponding exp UUIDs and flags. A more > > > flexible tester may be required so that the tester would not be broken > > > whenever a new exp feature is added. > > > > I would prefer to have the mgmt-tester changes applied as well so we > > don't have false positives for other patches causing mgmt-tester to > > fail, in fact we include CI is useful to validate this changes so we > > can check the feature is correctly exposed to userspace and UUID is > > properly formatted, etc, it shouldn't be a big change to mgmt-tester > > thought if you just include the new UUID later on we can think about > > how we could make it more extensible so it doesn't break when a new > > feature is added. > > > > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 5:54 PM Joseph Hwang <josephsih@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > (Resent this email to contain only plaintext.) > > > > > > > > Hi Luiz: > > > > > > > > It seems that mgmt-tester currently uses a fixed feature count. > > > > Every time a new exp feature is added, the mgmt-tester would be > > > > broken. By checking the kernel, it seems that there are currently 2 or > > > > 3 exp features, i.e., debug uuid, simultaneous central peripheral > > > > uuid, and LL privacy uuid. Note that the debug exp feature is guarded > > > > by CONFIG_BT_FEATURE_DEBUG. So I am not sure how the kernel is > > > > configured and made on your test setup. > > > > > > > > If we fix the mgmt-tester in bluez to have 3 or 4 (which one?) > > > > features before merging the kernel changes here that adds a new > > > > quality exp feature, it would not match the existing kernel which has > > > > only 2 or 3 features. > > > > > > > > Do you have any preference about how to fix the mgmt-tester? > > > > > > > > My suggestion is to remove the checking of the feature count from > > > > the mgmt-tester. The feature count changes over time. It is possible > > > > to implement a customized exp_feat_check function which can be more > > > > flexible. If a uuid is found in the MGMT response, its associated > > > > flags are checked against. > > > > > > > > The data currently used in the mgmt-tester: > > > > > > > > static const uint8_t read_exp_feat_param_success[] = { > > > > 0x02, 0x00, /* Feature Count */ > > > > 0xd6, 0x49, 0xb0, 0xd1, 0x28, 0xeb, /* UUID - Simultaneous */ > > > > 0x27, 0x92, 0x96, 0x46, 0xc0, 0x42, /* Central Peripheral */ > > > > 0xb5, 0x10, 0x1b, 0x67, > > > > 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */ > > > > 0x04, 0x00, 0x13, 0xac, 0x42, 0x02, /* UUID - LL Privacy */ > > > > 0xde, 0xb3, 0xea, 0x11, 0x73, 0xc2, > > > > 0x48, 0xa1, 0xc0, 0x15, > > > > 0x02, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */ > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know what you think. > > > > > > > > Thanks and regards, > > > > Joseph > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 1:49 AM Luiz Augusto von Dentz > > > > <luiz.dentz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Joseph, > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 6:25 AM <bluez.test.bot@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email! > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear submitter, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list. > > > > > > This is a CI test results with your patch series: > > > > > > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=531683 > > > > > > > > > > > > ---Test result--- > > > > > > > > > > > > Test Summary: > > > > > > CheckPatch PASS 2.92 seconds > > > > > > GitLint PASS 0.61 seconds > > > > > > BuildKernel PASS 598.41 seconds > > > > > > TestRunner: Setup PASS 394.12 seconds > > > > > > TestRunner: l2cap-tester PASS 2.89 seconds > > > > > > TestRunner: bnep-tester PASS 2.07 seconds > > > > > > TestRunner: mgmt-tester FAIL 30.94 seconds > > > > > > TestRunner: rfcomm-tester PASS 2.31 seconds > > > > > > TestRunner: sco-tester PASS 2.20 seconds > > > > > > TestRunner: smp-tester FAIL 2.27 seconds > > > > > > TestRunner: userchan-tester PASS 2.09 seconds > > > > > > > > > > > > Details > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: CheckPatch - PASS - 2.92 seconds > > > > > > Run checkpatch.pl script with rule in .checkpatch.conf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: GitLint - PASS - 0.61 seconds > > > > > > Run gitlint with rule in .gitlint > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: BuildKernel - PASS - 598.41 seconds > > > > > > Build Kernel with minimal configuration supports Bluetooth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: TestRunner: Setup - PASS - 394.12 seconds > > > > > > Setup environment for running Test Runner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: TestRunner: l2cap-tester - PASS - 2.89 seconds > > > > > > Run test-runner with l2cap-tester > > > > > > Total: 40, Passed: 40 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: TestRunner: bnep-tester - PASS - 2.07 seconds > > > > > > Run test-runner with bnep-tester > > > > > > Total: 1, Passed: 1 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: TestRunner: mgmt-tester - FAIL - 30.94 seconds > > > > > > Run test-runner with mgmt-tester > > > > > > Total: 448, Passed: 444 (99.1%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 3 > > > > > > > > > > > > Failed Test Cases > > > > > > Read Exp Feature - Success Failed 0.012 seconds > > > > > > > > > > Looks like there is a regression on mgmt-tester: > > > > > > > > > > Read Exp Feature - Success - run > > > > > Sending Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049) > > > > > Test condition added, total 1 > > > > > Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049): Success (0x00) > > > > > Invalid cmd response parameter size > > > > > Read Exp Feature - Success - test failed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: TestRunner: rfcomm-tester - PASS - 2.31 seconds > > > > > > Run test-runner with rfcomm-tester > > > > > > Total: 9, Passed: 9 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: TestRunner: sco-tester - PASS - 2.20 seconds > > > > > > Run test-runner with sco-tester > > > > > > Total: 8, Passed: 8 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: TestRunner: smp-tester - FAIL - 2.27 seconds > > > > > > Run test-runner with smp-tester > > > > > > Total: 8, Passed: 7 (87.5%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > Failed Test Cases > > > > > > SMP Client - SC Request 2 Failed 0.024 seconds > > > > > > > > > > > > ############################## > > > > > > Test: TestRunner: userchan-tester - PASS - 2.09 seconds > > > > > > Run test-runner with userchan-tester > > > > > > Total: 3, Passed: 3 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Linux Bluetooth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Luiz Augusto von Dentz > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Joseph Shyh-In Hwang > > > > Email: josephsih@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Joseph Shyh-In Hwang > > > Email: josephsih@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > > > -- > > Luiz Augusto von Dentz > > > > -- > > Joseph Shyh-In Hwang > Email: josephsih@xxxxxxxxxx -- Joseph Shyh-In Hwang Email: josephsih@xxxxxxxxxx
