Closed Bug 1017488 Opened 10 years ago Closed 10 years ago

Intermittent B2G TEST-UNEXPECTED-PASS | flexbox-inlinecontent-horiz-3c.xhtml | image comparison (==)

Categories

(Core :: Layout, defect)

Product:
Core
Component:
Layout
Platform:
ARM
Gonk (Firefox OS)
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

()

Status:
RESOLVED FIXED
Milestone:
mozilla32
Tracking Flags:
Tracking Status
firefox30 --- unaffected
firefox31 --- unaffected
firefox32 --- fixed
firefox-esr24 --- unaffected

People

(Reporter: emorley, Assigned: ahal)

References

Details

(Keywords: intermittent-failure)

Attachments

(1 file, 1 obsolete file)

change from fails to random
1.89 KB, patch
dholbert
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review 
b2g_emulator_vm b2g-inbound opt test reftest-8 on 2014-05-28 20:47:28 PDT for push 437a98f062f0

slave: tst-linux64-spot-1047

https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=40606395&tree=B2g-Inbound

{
21:11:25     INFO -  REFTEST TEST-UNEXPECTED-PASS | http://10.0.2.2:8888/tests/layout/reftests/flexbox/flexbox-inlinecontent-horiz-3c.xhtml | image comparison (==)
}
Attached image the "passing" reftest snapshot (obsolete) — 
This "pass" is because both testcase & reference case look like this attached image, which is just the words:
  "image not available"
which I assume comes from here (the only instance of that string in m-c, at least):
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/toolkit/devtools/server/actors/inspector.js?rev=dcec4c42cd18&mark=311-311#291
Note bug 981477 recently changed the manifest, marking this and others as fails-if, but it seems that the try run used to work out what would fail when switching to running B2G reftests oop has found a few that are more in the random-if camp.
Semi-disregard comment 2 -- it looks like the "image not available" is actually just coming from reftest-analyzer (that's where I saved the image from), and reftest-analyzer is showing that because the data URI in the log is broken.

So, we don't actually know what the image looks like. But per comment 3, if this "fails" annotation is very recent, then it presumably wants to be "random", I guess (?)
Just copying the data: URL out of the log works for me for looking at the image.
Flags: needinfo?(dholbert)
Ah -- copying the first one does. Copying the second one does not.  (I arbitrarily picked the second one.)  So, we do know what the image looks like after all.  Looks like this is indeed just a normal unexpected pass, then, and may just want to be random-if instead of fails-if, per comment 3.

(edmorley suggested this morning that the data-URI-truncation is from logcat (or some logcat processing tool) imposing a max-length on lines. Looks like the working data URI is 7706 characters long; the broken one is truncated to 863 characters.)
Flags: needinfo?(dholbert)
Attachment #8430843 - Attachment is obsolete: true
(to be clear: by "first one" & "second one", I'm talking about the two links below "Summary" for the test-failure, in the log at https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=40606395&tree=B2g-Inbound )
Ok, so seems like everyone is agreeing to change this from fails to random?
Attachment #8431552 - Flags: review?(dholbert)
Comment on attachment 8431552 [details] [diff] [review]
change from fails to random

Thanks. Sounds good to me.

(I'll bet the other "fails-if(B2G&&browserIsRemote)" tests here (and maybe all such tests?) really want the same treatment, but I suppose we can wait and see on the others.)
Attachment #8431552 - Flags: review?(dholbert) → review+
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/41b6cd217bde
Assignee: nobody → ahalberstadt
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla32
Whoops, meant that for bug 981477.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: