Issues #5319
T1782 sCtl7 addcause "inconsistent-parameters" when check=00 not-supported
Added by Richard Schimmel over 2 years ago.
Updated about 2 years ago.
Discuss in Upcoming Meeting:
No
Closed Reason:
No Action Taken
Description
The current Ed2 and Amd1 sCtl7 test procedure allows to ignore the check=00 and still perform the interlock/synchro check. Currently the TP allow AddCause not-supported and blocked-by-interlocking. The Tissue is very clear and requires "inconsistent-parameters".
Proposal are:
- Amd1 to only allow "inconsistent-parameters"
- Ed2 allow not-supported, blocked-by-interlocking and inconsistent-parameters.
Files
- Test Case ID set to sCtl7
Tissue 1782 is not part of the batch of tissues 57_2445_INF and should (shall) not be implemented in TP2.0.6 and TP1.2
Propose to split step 2 into 2 conditional steps (2 and 3) depending upon whether server supports or refuses Check bypass (or is configurable for both).
Attached revision shows blue text to add or strikethrough blue text to delete for the Ed2.0 test procedures. PIXIT CT8 is also modified.
For Ed2.1 test procedures, the attached text is also used except that the text ["Not-supported" or] is removed from expected result step 2 and Ct8 PIXIT entry.
Step 3 was incorrect. If Client request interlock byoass and DUT specifies that it allows interlock bypass then DUT should respond positively and NOT with an error.
sCtl7_proposal_Ed2p1_20220306 is attached
- Status changed from New to In Progress
As agreed during TPWG meeting 08-March-2022, removed from Expected result 2 ability of DUT to respond positively.
Test procedure sCtl7_proposal_Ed2p1_20220308.docx atached.
Also note that attached test procedure is for Ed2.0 and the corresponding Ed2.1 procedure is same except Expected result step 2 omits [“Not-supported” or ] in 5 places
There is a discrepancy between the testing procedure and the tissue resolution.
Old testing procedures were allowing "not-supported" or "blocked-by-interlocking".
Tissue resolution specifies only "inconsistent-parameters"
New testing procedures is allowing "inconsistent-parameters" OR "not-supported" or "blocked-by-interlocking".
- Status changed from Resolved to In Progress
During the Conformance Test Verification stage, the editofrs discussed the discrepancy between the testing procedure and and the tissue resolution.
Old testing procedures were allowing "not-supported" or "blocked-by-interlocking".
Tissue resolution specifies only "inconsistent-parameters"
New testing procedures is allowing "inconsistent-parameters" OR "not-supported" or "blocked-by-interlocking".
The tissue resolution under drafting propose now the usage of addCause "Not-supported".
How can a test procedure overwrite the tissue resolution? I.e. if the resolution propses 1 addCause, how can it end in the test procedure as 3 addCauses?
- Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from Yes to No
- Due date set to 08/09/2022
TISSUE still in progress.
- Due date changed from 08/09/2022 to 10/04/2022
- Due date changed from 10/04/2022 to 10/18/2022
- Project changed from Server to Client
- Due date changed from 10/18/2022 to 11/01/2022
- Assignee set to Richard Schimmel
- Initial Test Document changed from TP2.0.5 and Ed2Amd1 TP1.1 to TP1.0
- Test Case ID deleted (
sCtl7)
TISSUE resolved.
Client TP, PIXIT need to change.
sCtl7 does not need to be updated.
- Project changed from Client to Server
- Status changed from In Progress to Closed
- Closed Reason No Action Taken added
- Closed Reason deleted (
Test Procedure Update)
No change to server, new issue open for client.
Also available in: Atom
PDF