[Feature] Use chip-tool fabrics for python tests#72259
Open
greens wants to merge 3 commits into
Open
Conversation
…w for shared fabrics across chip-tool and the python testing framework
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request adds support for INI-formatted chip-tool persistent storage configuration files by introducing --chip-tool-common-storage-path and --chip-tool-fabric-storage-path arguments, and updating the stack initialization to use PersistentStorageINI. The review feedback suggests: 1) adding type=pathlib.Path to the new arguments for automatic parsing, 2) explicitly erroring out if both --storage-path and the new chip-tool storage paths are provided, and 3) keeping the default value of storage_path as pathlib.Path(".") to avoid breaking backward compatibility, which also simplifies the stack initialization logic.
|
PR #72259: Size comparison from 8ad5f7b to 86aa69c Full report (25 builds for bl602, bl616, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, efr32, esp32, nrfconnect, psoc6, qpg, realtek, stm32)
|
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #72259 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 55.51% 55.52% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 1628 1630 +2
Lines 111083 111127 +44
Branches 13416 13418 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 61668 61706 +38
- Misses 49415 49421 +6 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
greens
commented
May 30, 2026
| LOGGER.warning( | ||
| "Didn't find any CertificateAuthorities in storage -- creating a new CertificateAuthority + FabricAdmin...") | ||
| ca = self._certificate_authority_manager.NewCertificateAuthority(caIndex=self._config.root_of_trust_index) | ||
| ca = self._certificate_authority_manager.NewCertificateAuthority() |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was what was causing the REPL to have to be run first: it was creating a 1-indexed certificate authority list where a 0-indexed one is expected.
|
PR #72259: Size comparison from 8ad5f7b to e33cf60 Full report (35 builds for bl602, bl616, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, efr32, esp32, nrfconnect, psoc6, qpg, realtek, stm32, telink)
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Allows python tests to use fabrics generated by chip-tool via the
chip_tool_config.iniandchip_tool_config.[example CA].inistorage files, as opposed to the.jsonfiles created/used by the python framework. This builds on work done here: #40588 that allowed the python REPL to use the same storage files.Adds two new arguments to base python tests:
Example usage:
First, commission a device using the chip-tool:
Start device:
In a separate shell:
Note
Just commissioning the device is not sufficient to fully populate the two
.inifiles for loading by python tests. It is recommended to run a YAML test against the device, after which thechip_tool_config.iniwill contain the necessary caList section:Example of running a YAML test:
After these steps, you can then run a python test on the same fabric on which you previously commissioned the device.
Example:
Testing
The above steps were used to verify the behavior. Python tests without the new arguments were used to verify a lack of regressions.