This is a nice improvement. The comment below won't necessarily results
in any changes, so:
Reviewed-by: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.lin...@pantheon.tech>
diff --git a/dts/framework/test_suite.py b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
@@ -303,6 +329,40 @@ def verify_packets(self, expected_packet: Packet,
received_packets: list[Packet]
)
self._fail_test_case_verify("An expected packet not found among
received packets.")
+ def match_all_packets(
+ self, expected_packets: list[Packet], received_packets: list[Packet]
+ ) -> None:
+ """Matches all the expected packets against the received ones.
+
+ Matching is performed by counting down the occurrences in a dictionary
which keys are the
+ raw packet bytes. No deep packet comparison is performed. All the
unexpected packets (noise)
+ are automatically ignored.
+
+ Args:
+ expected_packets: The packets we are expecting to receive.
+ received_packets: All the packets that were received.
+
+ Raises:
+ TestCaseVerifyError: if and not all the `expected_packets` were
found in
+ `received_packets`.
+ """
+ expected_packets_counters = Counter(map(raw, expected_packets))
+ received_packets_counters = Counter(map(raw, received_packets))
+ # The number of expected packets is subtracted by the number of
received packets, ignoring
+ # any unexpected packets and capping at zero.
+ missing_packets_counters = expected_packets_counters -
received_packets_counters
+ missing_packets_count = missing_packets_counters.total()
+ self._logger.debug(
+ f"match_all_packets: expected {len(expected_packets)}, "
+ f"received {len(received_packets)}, missing
{missing_packets_count}"
+ )
+
+ if missing_packets_count != 0:
+ self._fail_test_case_verify(
+ f"Not all packets were received, expected {len(expected_packets)}
"
+ f"but {missing_packets_count} were missing."
+ )
+
Is it worthwhile to log the missing packets? It's not necessary, as the
received packets are logged elsewhere, but it would be convenient. On
the other hand, it could just unnecessarily bloat logs.
