Mismatch of CY8CKIT-064B0S2-4343W target name

[MarceloSalazar]

Description of defect

There is mismatch on the target name between Tools and Mbed OS.

• In mbed-os-tools (mbed-ls) and online database, it's defined as CY8CKIT064B0S2_4343W
• In Mbed OS (targets.json), it's defined as CY8CKIT_064B0S2_4343W (extra _)

This means the target configuration doesn't work out of the box and Mbed CLI is not able to run automated tests.

Proposed fix: update targets.json asap so deliver the change in the upcoming version of Mbed OS.

Target(s) affected by this defect ?

CY8CKIT_064B0S2_4343W

Toolchain(s) (name and version) displaying this defect ?

Any

What version of Mbed-os are you using (tag or sha) ?

aff95c0d190a5528e4704de3e281b2e52c7ae980

What version(s) of tools are you using. List all that apply (E.g. mbed-cli)

Mbed CLI

How is this defect reproduced ?

mbed test -t ARM -m CY8CKIT_064B0S2_4343W --compile

This may potentially impact PR https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os/pull/13418

@ARMmbed/team-cypress @ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers

[vmedcy]

See https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os-tools/pull/213#discussion_r373248219 comment from @morser499 :

I have reduced the length to 20 characters for the new boards. Unfortunately this makes the names inconsistent with other boards which can lead to confusion. Hopefully this limit can be addressed sometime soon.

@romanjoe - I wonder how the testing was performed for https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os/pull/13122 - have you happened to use the 'mbedls --mock' command, or manually patched the platform database?

[romanjoe]

@vmedcy i was using mbedls -m approach for testing

[jamesbeyond]

In mbed OS CI, the test is done in 2 parts, Build test (only build greentea binaries) and Greentea test (run those binaries on HW). the mbedls only will be used in Greentea test, but since we don' t have this target in our CI farm, the Greentea test is not run for this targets. Build test passed though.

[0xc0170]

@romanjoe @vmedcy Can we have this fixed today? 20 character limit is still present, therefore should be fixed in targets.json

[ciarmcom]

@MarceloSalazar thank you for raising this issue.Please take a look at the following comments:

We cannot automatically identify a release based on the version of Mbed OS that you have provided. Please provide either a single valid sha of the form #abcde12 or #3b8265d70af32261311a06e423ca33434d8d80de or a single valid release tag of the form mbed-os-x.y.z . E.g. 'master' is not a unique single snapshot. NOTE: If there are fields which are not applicable then please just add 'n/a' or 'None'.This indicates to us that at least all the fields have been considered. Please update the issue header with the missing information, the issue will not be mirroredto our internal defect tracking system or investigated until this has been fully resolved.

[0xc0170]

This was not yet fixed, was it ? We created already release candidate for 6.2.1

[maclobdell]

This issue was highlighted in https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os/issues/13218 @ARMmbed/team-cypress please resolve as soon as possible. This is important to make the board officially supported by Mbed (Mbed Enabled).

[ciarmcom]

Thank you for raising this detailed GitHub issue. I am now notifying our internal issue triagers. Internal Jira reference: https://jira.arm.com/browse/IOTOSM-2173

[ciarmcom]

We closed this issue because it has been inactive for quite some time and we believe it to be low priority. If you think that the priority should be higher, then please reopen with your justification for increasing the priority.