Enhance metadata test to verify sensor timestamp #12642
Merged
Conversation
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
Collaborator
Author
|
Excluded D457 as it is not supported |
OhadMeir
reviewed
Feb 8, 2024
| test.check(is_value_keep_increasing(rs.frame_metadata_value.frame_timestamp)) | ||
| test.finish() | ||
|
|
||
| # Test #3 Increasing frame timestamp |
OhadMeir
reviewed
Feb 8, 2024
Comment on lines
83
to
84
| def is_value_keep_increasing(metadata_value, number_frames_to_test=50) -> bool: | ||
| """ |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Need to update prev_metadata_value each iteration
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wow, how did it work before??
OhadMeir
reviewed
Feb 8, 2024
| testing_profiles[p] = s | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def is_metadata_values_different(metadata_type_1, metadata_type_2, number_frames_to_test=50) -> bool: |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
are_metadata_values_different
Also in the comment - Check that the given 2 metadata types values are different
OhadMeir
reviewed
Feb 8, 2024
| def is_metadata_values_different(metadata_type_1, metadata_type_2, number_frames_to_test=50) -> bool: | ||
| """ | ||
| Check that the given 2 metadata types value is different, it is handy when we expect different timetags / counters and such | ||
| :param metadata_type_1: first valuse that we need to check |
OhadMeir
reviewed
Feb 8, 2024
| ############################################################################################# | ||
| # get metadata depth units value and make sure it's non zero and equal to the depth sensor matching option value | ||
| test.start("checking depth units on metadata") | ||
| test.start("checking sensor timestanp on metadata") |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Typo
Also looks like this did not need to change. Please check again.
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch, will revert
OhadMeir
approved these changes
Feb 8, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
We expect frame timestamp to be different than sensor timestamp.
Sensor timestamp should be around frame timestamp - (actual exposure / 2), for sanity we just check it is increasing and not equal to the frame timestamp
Tracked on [RSDEV-401]