Fix duplicate test name causing compilation error in device_api_gtest - #228

Problem

After the isSecureDbgSrvUnlocked() refactor in PR #205 (branch topic/RDKEMW-13335), the CI unit test job "Execute unit tests in gtest test suite" is failing with:

L1 UNIT TEST FAILED. PLEASE CHECK AND FIX
##[error]Process completed with exit code 1.

Root Cause

The refactor changed GetServURL() in src/deviceutils/device_api.c to call isSecureDbgSrvUnlocked(eBuildType) instead of directly calling isDebugServicesEnabled().

For VBN builds (BUILD_TYPE=vbn → eVBN), isSecureDbgSrvUnlocked() returns true immediately on the non-PROD early-return path (line 62–64 of device_api.c) without ever calling isDebugServicesEnabled():

if ((eBuildType != ePROD) && (eBuildType != eUNKNOWN)) {
    isDebugServicesUnlocked = true;
}

However, 4 VBN-based GetServURL tests in unittest/deviceutils/device_api_gtest.cpp still set EXPECT_CALL(*g_DeviceUtilsMock, isDebugServicesEnabled()).Times(1), which causes gMock to report "Expected to be called exactly once, but never called" — failing those tests.

Required Fix

In file unittest/deviceutils/device_api_gtest.cpp, remove the EXPECT_CALL(*g_DeviceUtilsMock, isDebugServicesEnabled()) lines from the following 4 VBN-based test cases (since isDebugServicesEnabled() is no longer called for non-PROD builds):

1. TestName_GetServURL_SuccessStatered_DebugServices_Enabled (around line 642)

   • Remove: EXPECT_CALL(*g_DeviceUtilsMock, isDebugServicesEnabled()).Times(1).WillOnce(Return(true));

2. TestName_GetServURL_SuccessStatered_DebugServices_Disabled (around line 661)

   • Remove: EXPECT_CALL(*g_DeviceUtilsMock, isDebugServicesEnabled()).Times(1).WillOnce(Return(false));

3. TestName_GetServURL_SuccessSwupdate_DebugServices_Enabled (around line 756)

   • Remove: EXPECT_CALL(*g_DeviceUtilsMock, isDebugServicesEnabled()).Times(1).WillOnce(Return(true));

4. TestName_GetServURL_SuccessSwupdate_DebugServices_Disabled (around line 776)

   • Remove: EXPECT_CALL(*g_DeviceUtilsMock, isDebugServicesEnabled()).Times(1).WillOnce(Return(false));

These are the only changes needed. Do NOT modify any source code files — only the test file unittest/deviceutils/device_api_gtest.cpp.

Important Notes

• Do NOT touch any files other than unittest/deviceutils/device_api_gtest.cpp
• Do NOT modify any of the isSecureDbgSrvUnlocked tests or PROD-based GetServURL tests — those are correct
• The PROD-based tests (TestName_GetServURL_SuccessStatered_Prod_DebugServices_Enabled, TestName_GetServURL_SuccessStatered_Prod_DebugServices_Disabled, TestName_GetServURL_SuccessSwupdate_Prod_DebugServices_Enabled, TestName_GetServURL_SuccessSwupdate_Prod_DebugServices_Disabled) correctly mock isDebugServicesEnabled() because the PROD path in isSecureDbgSrvUnlocked() does call it — leave those alone

The following is the prior conversation context from the user's chat exploration (may be truncated):

User: @Copilot Accepted Confirmation: Are you sure?

Assistant: I've kicked off a Copilot coding agent to create a pull request with the additional unit tests. You can track the progress here:

data:
    - title: 'Add comprehensive unit tests for isSecureDbgSrvUnlocked and getDeviceTypeRFC'
      repository: rdkcentral/rdkfwupdater
      url: https://github.com/copilot/tasks/pull/PR_kwDONFJM2M7LaxF9
      state: queued

The PR will add the following new tests to maximize line coverage of the PR #205 changes:

device_api_gtest.cpp — isSecureDbgSrvUnlocked additional tests:

fwdl_interface_gtest.cpp — getDeviceTypeRFC additional tests:

User: Should I add these along with the exisitng test cases or scrap them and add only these?

Assistant: You should add these along with the existing test cases — do not scrap the existing ones.

The PR already has good foundational tests covering the core scenarios (e.g., ePROD with labsigned/deviceType/dbgServices combos, NULL args, read failure, prod/test/unknown RFC values). The new tests I've proposed are complementary — they cov...