CreatedItem and ChangedItem are missing TimestampItem's Range constraint

Thanks for picking this up @annmarysruthy!

Looks perfect.

This will need some test coverage to go in, though. I looked around a bit and found \Drupal\KernelTests\Core\Entity\EntityValidationTest::checkValidation. I think it would make sense to add some checks to that as that already tests various field-type-specific constraints. All the tested entity types should also have a created field, so just adding a test for that should work fine. And for the changed field you can check if the entity type implements EntityChangedInterface as only a couple entity types have that.

Marking needs work for that.

I am working on this issue

I tried to add validation for the ChangedItem field as shown below, but I am not getting the expected validation failure for the invalid changed timestamp.

 if ($entity instanceof \Drupal\Core\Entity\EntityChangedInterface && $entity->hasField('changed')) {
      // This entity has a 'changed' field. You can now safely test it.
      $test_entity = clone $entity;
      $test_entity->set('changed', -2147483649);  // Invalid timestamp (below min range)
      // Validate the entity.
      $violations = $test_entity->validate();
      $this->assertEquals(1, $violations->count(), 'Validation failed for invalid changed timestamp.');
      $this->assertEquals('The changed timestamp is out of the valid range.', $violations[0]->getMessage());

      // Valid 'changed' timestamp.
      $test_entity->set('changed', 1234567890);  // Valid timestamp
      $violations = $test_entity->validate();
      $this->assertEquals(0, $violations->count(), 'Valid changed timestamp passed validation.');
    }

Nice work with the test coverage.

Ahh, how annoying. I think that is because one of the test entities uses the changed_test item (i.e. \Drupal\entity_test\Plugin\Field\FieldType\ChangedTestItem) instead of the regular changed. I had missed that initially when looking into this. I guess we could also add the constraint to the test field type one, but that then kind of feels like testing the test coverage. Alternatively we could check that $entity->get('changed')->getFieldDefinition()->getType() is in fact changed (and not changed_test). I guess I like the latter solution a bit better, but also open to what you think.

I've updated the test to include a check for the actual field type, so it now only runs if the changed field uses the real 'changed' type (not the changed_test).

Thanks for sticking with this @prabha1997!

I tried it out locally and I guess my suggestion above was not really great. Turns out the inside of the if is reached. I had seen that the entity_test_constraints entity type has an actual changed field, but unfortunately that is not one of the entity types used in the test. (See \Drupal\entity_test\EntityTestHelper::getEntityTypes().) All of this is a bit of a mess, but not one we will have to fix here, I hope. So I looked into how to get an actual changed field into the entity types being tested without rewriting the entire test and found that the test entity types support adding base field definitions via state. I wasn't sure whether that actually worked as intended so I tried it out to be sure. And since I already had it then I went ahead and pushed it to the branch, I hope that was OK.

Maybe you can take a look and see if you agree with those changes, thanks!