From 4ed9edf5b906883d73de061442f139cd06dbb571 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Neels Hofmeyr Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 00:35:06 +0100 Subject: bsc: TC_chan_act_ack_est_ind_noreply: use f_expect_chan_rel Instead of placing an own set of channel release expectations, just use the common f_expect_chan_rel() that exists for exactly this purpose. This will also be in line with upcoming changes to tighten checking of the lchan release messages. Related: OS#3413 Change-Id: Ib7dd886472337e2deb968e6f9de6cecdb7855319 --- bsc/BSC_Tests.ttcn | 10 +--------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-) (limited to 'bsc') diff --git a/bsc/BSC_Tests.ttcn b/bsc/BSC_Tests.ttcn index 551ffe05..a2a33783 100644 --- a/bsc/BSC_Tests.ttcn +++ b/bsc/BSC_Tests.ttcn @@ -429,15 +429,7 @@ testcase TC_chan_act_ack_est_ind_noreply() runs on test_CT { /* expect BSC to disable the channel again if there's no response from MSC */ /* MS waits 20s (T3210) at LU; 10s (T3230) at CM SERV REQ and 5s (T3220) AT detach */ - IPA_RSL[0].clear; - alt { - [] IPA_RSL[0].receive(tr_ASP_RSL_UD(sid, tr_RSL_MsgTypeD(RSL_MT_RF_CHAN_REL))) -> value rx_rsl_ud { } - [] IPA_RSL[0].receive(tr_ASP_RSL_UD(sid, tr_RSL_REL_REQ(chan_nr, ?))) -> value rx_rsl_ud { - f_ipa_tx(0, ts_RSL_REL_CONF(chan_nr, main_dcch)); - repeat; - } - } - + f_expect_chan_rel(0, chan_nr); setverdict(pass); } -- cgit v1.2.3