Inconsistency errors previously qualified design

[jaspervp]

We are releasing a firmware update which adds an additional bluetooth profile. Since we do not want or can retest the entire stack, we use a Previously Qualified Design (51744).
The bluetooth launch tool reports inconsistency errors in the layers provided by Nordic.

Does this mean that it is impossible to use the Previously Qualified Design or can we just ignore the warnings?

[run_ar]

What warnings do you get?

Are you also updating the SD version? or are you using the same Softdevice? In case you are updating the SD version are you using any new features with the new profile?

[jaspervp]

We are using the same softdevice.

The warnings are:

27:C.2 | If [GAP] (0a/1 and 5/3) are Supported then [GAP] (27/4) is Mandatory
27:C.3 | If [GAP] (5/3 and 38/3) are Not Supported then [GAP] (27/5-7) are Excluded
GATT > ATT | If [GATT] (3/22) is Supported then [ATT] (3/22) is Mandatory
GATT > ATT | If [GATT] (3/16) is Supported then [ATT] (3/22) is Mandatory
GATT > ATT | If [GATT] (3/15) is Supported then [ATT] (3/22) is Mandatory
GATT > ATT | If [GATT] (4/22) is Supported then [ATT] (4/22) is Mandatory
GATT > ATT | If [GATT] (4/16) is Supported then [ATT] (4/22) is Mandatory
GATT > ATT | If [GATT] (4/15) is Supported then [ATT] (4/22) is Mandatory
3B:Prerequisite | If [GATT] (1/3) is Not Supported then [GATT] (3B/1-38) is Excluded
4B:Prerequisite | If [GATT] (1/4) is Not Supported then [GATT] (4B/1-38) are Excluded

[run_ar]

Are you referencing the QDID on the "Project Basics" pane or the "Product Declaration" pane? It's my understanding that you should wait to reference the qualified design until you reach the "Product Declaration" pane, and that if you reference the QDID in the "Project Basics" pane the test plan will include test cases for that QDID.

[jaspervp]

We were using the "Project Basics" pane. We will use the "Product Declaration" pane instead.

Thank you for clarifying