DMTF / SPDM-Responder-Validator

BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
10 stars 14 forks source link

Test case 1.2 failed #43

Closed Wenxing-hou closed 1 year ago

Wenxing-hou commented 1 year ago

When use the latest libspdm, the test case 1.2 failed.

test suite (spdm_responder_conformance_test) - pass: 2563, fail: 2
test group 1 (spdm_test_group_version) - pass: 11, fail: 1
  test case 1.1 (spdm_test_case_version_success) - pass: 7, fail: 0
  test case 1.2 (spdm_test_case_version_invalid_request) - pass: 4, fail: 1
steven-bellock commented 1 year ago

libspdm now returns SPDM_ERROR_CODE_VERSION_MISMATCH instead of SPDM_ERROR_CODE_INVALID_REQUEST. But regardless of the error code the 1.2 test shouldn't exist, as the SPDM specification doesn't say what should be done in this case.

https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/blob/4f8f99005368cb0e0091ef07b693631593af9b97/library/spdm_responder_lib/libspdm_rsp_version.c#L38-L42

Wenxing-hou commented 1 year ago

libspdm now returns SPDM_ERROR_CODE_VERSION_MISMATCH instead of SPDM_ERROR_CODE_INVALID_REQUEST. But regardless of the error code the 1.2 test shouldn't exist, as the SPDM specification doesn't say what should be done in this case.

https://github.com/DMTF/libspdm/blob/4f8f99005368cb0e0091ef07b693631593af9b97/library/spdm_responder_lib/libspdm_rsp_version.c#L38-L42

Yes. The spec doesn't clear this behavior. So I think we can change return value for this issue and keep the check until there are more detail behavior in spec.

jyao1 commented 1 year ago

I think we can keep both values be valid.

jyao1 commented 1 year ago

please update document as well.