Bug 1886772 Comment 1 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

If I'm reading the log right, this test was judged as a TIMEOUT after only 2.5 seconds (`took 2534ms`)... that seems suspiciously low.  I thought 10s was our timeout threshold for WPTs?

jgraham or jmaher, do you know what might be going on here?  Do we actually have a ~2.5 second timeout threshold for these tests? (If so, we should probably increase that; some of the nearby tests are taking e.g. `1732ms`, ` 1976ms`, `2229ms`, if I scroll around a bit in the log -- super close to whatever threshold this test happened to trip over.
If I'm reading the log right, this test was judged as a TIMEOUT after only 2.5 seconds (`took 2534ms`)... that seems suspiciously low for a "test timed out" judgement.  I thought 10s was our timeout threshold for WPTs?

jgraham or jmaher, do you know what might be going on here?  Do we actually have a ~2.5 second timeout threshold for these tests? (If so, we should probably increase that; some of the nearby tests are taking e.g. `1732ms`, ` 1976ms`, `2229ms`, if I scroll around a bit in the log -- super close to whatever threshold this test happened to trip over.)
If I'm reading the log right, this test was judged as a TIMEOUT after only 2.5 seconds (`took 2534ms`)... that seems suspiciously low for a "test timed out" judgement.  I thought 10s was our default/lowest timeout threshold for WPTs?

jgraham or jmaher, do you know what might be going on here?  Do we actually have a ~2.5 second timeout threshold for these tests? (If so, we should probably increase that; some of the nearby tests are taking e.g. `1732ms`, ` 1976ms`, `2229ms`, if I scroll around a bit in the log -- super close to whatever threshold this test happened to trip over.)

Back to Bug 1886772 Comment 1