Closed
Bug 785860
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
Permanent orange: TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | test_sts_preloadlist.js:6: TypeError: Cc['@mozilla.org/privatebrowsing;1'] is undefined
Categories
(Core :: Networking, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla18
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox17 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: mconley, Assigned: geekboy)
References
Details
(Keywords: intermittent-failure)
Attachments
(2 files, 1 obsolete file)
4.67 KB,
patch
|
briansmith
:
review+
mconley
:
feedback+
akeybl
:
approval-mozilla-aurora+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
1.81 KB,
patch
|
briansmith
:
review+
akeybl
:
approval-mozilla-aurora+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
We've got the following permanent orange showing up on our XPCShell tests: TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | /home/cltbld/talos-slave/test/build/xpcshell/tests/security/manager/ssl/tests/unit/test_sts_preloadlist.js | test failed (with xpcshell return code: 3), see following log: >>>>>>> ### XPCOM_MEM_LEAK_LOG defined -- logging leaks to /tmp/tmpAyQpHa/runxpcshelltests_leaks.log /home/cltbld/talos-slave/test/build/xpcshell/tests/security/manager/ssl/tests/unit/test_sts_preloadlist.js:6: TypeError: Cc['@mozilla.org/privatebrowsing;1'] is undefined WARNING: nsExceptionService ignoring thread destruction after shutdown: file ../../../../mozilla/xpcom/base/nsExceptionService.cpp, line 166 WARNING: OOPDeinit() without successful OOPInit(): file ../../../../mozilla/toolkit/crashreporter/nsExceptionHandler.cpp, line 2219 nsStringStats => mAllocCount: 2231 => mReallocCount: 185 => mFreeCount: 2231 => mShareCount: 7613 => mAdoptCount: 78 => mAdoptFreeCount: 78 <<<<<<< Thunderbird doesn't have the private browsing component registered, so this is why the test is failing. The test should be altered to account for this possibility - example test: http://mxr.mozilla.org/comm-central/source/mozilla/toolkit/components/contentprefs/tests/unit/test_bug248970.js#12
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
Here's a proposed fix. mconley: can you check it out and let me know if it works for you?
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 655626 [details] [diff] [review] proposed patch Yes, this looks like it'll do the job.
Attachment #655626 -
Flags: feedback?(mconley) → feedback+
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 655626 [details] [diff] [review] proposed patch Honza, can you do a quick review? The patch is pretty small, and I think you've recently seen this xpcshell test.
Attachment #655626 -
Flags: review?(honzab.moz)
Updated•12 years ago
|
Component: Testing Infrastructure → Networking
Product: Thunderbird → Core
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #655626 -
Flags: review?(honzab.moz) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
Pushed to inbound: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/807627473028
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla18
Comment hidden (Legacy TBPL/Treeherder Robot) |
Comment hidden (Legacy TBPL/Treeherder Robot) |
Comment hidden (Legacy TBPL/Treeherder Robot) |
Comment hidden (Legacy TBPL/Treeherder Robot) |
Comment hidden (Legacy TBPL/Treeherder Robot) |
Comment hidden (Legacy TBPL/Treeherder Robot) |
Comment hidden (Legacy TBPL/Treeherder Robot) |
Comment 12•12 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/807627473028
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment hidden (Legacy TBPL/Treeherder Robot) |
Comment 14•12 years ago
|
||
Unfortunately, this actually causes hangs now on Thunderbird's tests. The cause is that we're missing run_next_test() that should be at the end of each function added via add_test(). What I don't quite understand is how the test currently passes for Firefox.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Comment 15•12 years ago
|
||
This fixes the missing run_next_test calls. Given I'm not sure about the FF case, I've pushed this to try on one platform just to make sure: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Try&rev=b32fbca7a5f7
Attachment #655932 -
Flags: review?(sstamm)
We can't unconditionally call run_next_test() because if we are running the private browsing mode tests, we rely on an observer to notify when the private browsing transitions have completed.
Attachment #656075 -
Flags: review?(bsmith)
Comment 17•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to David Keeler from comment #16) > Created attachment 656075 [details] [diff] [review] > conditionally run_next_test > > We can't unconditionally call run_next_test() because if we are running the > private browsing mode tests, we rely on an observer to notify when the > private browsing transitions have completed. Sorry, but I don't understand this. Assuming you are using the globally defined for xpcshell-tests run_next_test, it states: * Each test function must call run_next_test() when it's done. Test files * should call run_next_test() in their run_test function to execute all * async tests. http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/annotate/271ca35d7645/testing/xpcshell/head.js#l857 So I believe the test as-is isn't working correctly. The actual route it takes, I think, is that once the first run_next_test is called, it queues the first test for running, but because of the do_execute_soon, it doesn't actually queue the test - and instead, run_test() gets to exit before that do_execute_soon activates, and because there's no extra do_test_pending/do_test_finished, the test just exists, because the pending count is 0. If I'm wrong, I'd be grateful if you could point me to where run_next_test() is being called for the private browsing tests, as that's the bit I'm currently missing.
This is where run_next_test() gets called: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/271ca35d7645/security/manager/ssl/tests/unit/test_sts_preloadlist.js#l29 due to the observer on "private-browsing-transition-complete" (which gets triggered at the end of test_part1 and test_private_browsing1). The issue is we need to wait for that transition to complete before running the next test in each case.
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #656075 -
Flags: review?(bsmith) → review+
Comment 19•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 655932 [details] [diff] [review] Fix missing run_next_test calls Thanks, somehow I'd missed that.
Attachment #655932 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #655932 -
Flags: review?(sstamm)
I've started a try run for firefox: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Try&rev=9d16f4036117 Mark - I'm assuming the process for running the patch through thunderbird-try is similar, but I don't know the details. Would you mind taking care of that or telling me how?
Comment 21•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to David Keeler from comment #20) > I've started a try run for firefox: > https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Try&rev=9d16f4036117 OT: I'm surprised that you didn't limit that just to xpcshell. > Mark - I'm assuming the process for running the patch through > thunderbird-try is similar, but I don't know the details. Would you mind > taking care of that or telling me how? I've done it here: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Thunderbird-Try&rev=b03244136e20 For future reference, instructions here: https://wiki.mozilla.org/ReleaseEngineering/ThunderbirdTryServer
Comment 22•12 years ago
|
||
Ignore my previous try push, I'd forgotten to add the actual patch. This one includes the patch: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Thunderbird-Try&rev=46861c0a084b
Comment 23•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #22) > Ignore my previous try push, I'd forgotten to add the actual patch. This one > includes the patch: > > https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Thunderbird-Try&rev=46861c0a084b Sorry, messed up the file name, one last push: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Thunderbird-Try&rev=0cb753b91d9b
Comment 24•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #23) > https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Thunderbird-Try&rev=0cb753b91d9b Finally this was right and the tests have passed :-)
Comment 25•12 years ago
|
||
Thanks.
(In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #21) > OT: I'm surprised that you didn't limit that just to xpcshell. d'oh! > I've done it here: > > https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Thunderbird-Try&rev=b03244136e20 > > For future reference, instructions here: > https://wiki.mozilla.org/ReleaseEngineering/ThunderbirdTryServer Thanks. This looks good - marking checkin-needed.
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [tb-orange] → [tb-orange] [checkin-needed: conditionally run_next_test]
Comment 27•12 years ago
|
||
Landed on inbound: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/cd51f6ca80e2
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [tb-orange] [checkin-needed: conditionally run_next_test] → [tb-orange]
Comment 28•12 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/cd51f6ca80e2
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago → 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment 29•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 655626 [details] [diff] [review] proposed patch [Approval Request Comment] Bug caused by (feature/regressing bug #): bug 760307 - this causes a perma-orange unit test failure for applications that don't have the private browsing service installed. User impact if declined: None Testing completed (on m-c, etc.): Landed on m-c Risk to taking this patch (and alternatives if risky): None, test-only String or UUID changes made by this patch: None Both of the patches on this bug need to be accepted, however the statements are the same for both.
Attachment #655626 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Comment 30•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 656075 [details] [diff] [review] conditionally run_next_test See previous comment.
Attachment #656075 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Comment 31•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 655626 [details] [diff] [review] proposed patch [Triage Comment] Test-only fix approved for Aurora 17.
Attachment #655626 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora? → approval-mozilla-aurora+
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #656075 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora? → approval-mozilla-aurora+
Comment 32•12 years ago
|
||
I transplanted these to aurora: https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/cbb60055616c https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/085e6c6642d1
status-firefox17:
--- → fixed
Updated•12 years ago
|
Keywords: intermittent-failure
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [tb-orange]
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•