Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[BUG] chip::Access::AccessControl::ResetAccessControl not implemented #23415

Closed
msandstedt opened this issue Nov 1, 2022 · 0 comments · Fixed by #23416
Closed

[BUG] chip::Access::AccessControl::ResetAccessControl not implemented #23415

msandstedt opened this issue Nov 1, 2022 · 0 comments · Fixed by #23416
Assignees

Comments

@msandstedt
Copy link
Contributor

msandstedt commented Nov 1, 2022

Reproduction steps

chip::Access::AccessControl::SetAccessControl(AccessControl & accessControl) takes a reference and the symmetric chip::Access::AccessControl::ResetAccessControl is not implemented, making it impossible to release the injected AccessControl object instance from the sdk's singleton vendor.

This is a problem if the injected AccessControl instance doesn't last the lifetime of the program.

Bug prevalence

Always

GitHub hash of the SDK that was being used

eeb4cdc

Platform

core

Platform Version(s)

No response

Anything else?

No response

@msandstedt msandstedt self-assigned this Nov 1, 2022
msandstedt added a commit to msandstedt/connectedhomeip that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2022
It is not currently possible to release the injected AccessControl
instance from the sdk's Access control singleton vendor because the
symmetric reset method for Access::SetAccessControl isn't implemented.
This commit adds the implementation.

Fixes project-chip#23415
msandstedt added a commit to msandstedt/connectedhomeip that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2022
It is not currently possible to release the injected AccessControl
instance from the sdk's Access control singleton vendor because the
symmetric reset method for Access::SetAccessControl isn't implemented.
This commit adds the implementation.

Fixes project-chip#23415
msandstedt added a commit to msandstedt/connectedhomeip that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2022
It is not currently possible to release the injected AccessControl
instance from the sdk's Access control singleton vendor because the
symmetric reset method for Access::SetAccessControl isn't implemented.
This commit adds the implementation.

Fixes project-chip#23415
andy31415 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 3, 2022
* Implement chip::Access::AccessControl::ResetAccessControl

It is not currently possible to release the injected AccessControl
instance from the sdk's Access control singleton vendor because the
symmetric reset method for Access::SetAccessControl isn't implemented.
This commit adds the implementation.

Fixes #23415

* Per Andrei Litvin, s/ResetAccessControl/ResetAccessControlToDefault
adbridge pushed a commit to ARM-software/connectedhomeip that referenced this issue Nov 18, 2022
…ip#23416)

* Implement chip::Access::AccessControl::ResetAccessControl

It is not currently possible to release the injected AccessControl
instance from the sdk's Access control singleton vendor because the
symmetric reset method for Access::SetAccessControl isn't implemented.
This commit adds the implementation.

Fixes project-chip#23415

* Per Andrei Litvin, s/ResetAccessControl/ResetAccessControlToDefault
adbridge pushed a commit to ARM-software/connectedhomeip that referenced this issue Nov 18, 2022
…ip#23416)

* Implement chip::Access::AccessControl::ResetAccessControl

It is not currently possible to release the injected AccessControl
instance from the sdk's Access control singleton vendor because the
symmetric reset method for Access::SetAccessControl isn't implemented.
This commit adds the implementation.

Fixes project-chip#23415

* Per Andrei Litvin, s/ResetAccessControl/ResetAccessControlToDefault
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant