Closed Bug 1108833 Opened 11 years ago Closed 11 years ago

Inconsistent display of unread notifications on lockscreen between lock/unlock and restart of device

Categories

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Gaia::System::Lockscreen, defect)

ARM
Gonk (Firefox OS)
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(blocking-b2g:-, b2g-v2.1 affected, b2g-v2.2 affected)

RESOLVED INVALID
blocking-b2g -
Tracking Status
b2g-v2.1 --- affected
b2g-v2.2 --- affected

People

(Reporter: pcheng, Assigned: gweng)

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

Description: The device does not display a notification on the lockscreen if user receives a notification while the device is awake, as opposed to when device is rebooted, notification is then displayed on lockscreen. Additionally, the options in Settings app > Notifications don't seem to affect anything in this use case. STR: 1) Receive an SMS (or any form of notification) notification on DUT while DUT is awake - observe SMS notification pops up and retracts into a thin blue line on top. Do not clear the notification. 2) Press hardware power button twice to lock and unlock the device - observe there is NO lockscreen notification displayed 3) Long-press the power button and "Restart" - observe there IS lockscreen notification after restart Expected: Observations from step 2 and step 3 are consistent Actual: See step 2 & 3's inconsistent observations. Notes: 1) Repro rate: 3/3 2) Attaching a logcat 3) Tested on: Device: Flame 2.2 Master (shallow flash, 319MB mem) BuildID: 20141208123406 Gaia: bd4dcc8c4582e2368b47b0e62506d3031fb2fc09 Gecko: cfeda36af765 Version: 37.0a1 (2.2 Master) Firmware: V188-1 User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Mobile; rv:37.0) Gecko/37.0 Firefox/37.0
QA Whiteboard: [QAnalyst-Triage?]
Flags: needinfo?(jmitchell)
OS: Linux → Gonk (Firefox OS)
Hardware: x86 → ARM
QA-Wanted for Branch Checks
QA Whiteboard: [QAnalyst-Triage?]
Flags: needinfo?(jmitchell)
Keywords: qawanted
This issue also occurs on Flame 2.1. Following STR, step 2 doesn't display a notification on lockscreen but step 3 does. Device: Flame 2.1 BuildID: 20141208070634 Gaia: e81d3e7590ad63113baaffd154fcfa73fc297499 Gecko: 199d127fbeae Version: 34.0 (2.1) Firmware: V188-1 User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Mobile; rv:34.0) Gecko/34.0 Firefox/34.0 --------------- This issue does NOT occur on Flame 2.0. Following STR, step 2 and step 3 both don't display a notification on lockscreen. Since the notification bar/tray refactor isn't implemented in 2.0, I'm not setting 2.0 tracking flag and not marking it a regression. Device: Flame 2.0 BuildID: 20141208061237 Gaia: 856863962362030174bae4e03d59c3ebbc182473 Gecko: 2d0860bd0225 Version: 32.0 (2.0) Firmware: V188-1 User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Mobile; rv:32.0) Gecko/32.0 Firefox/32.0
QA Whiteboard: [QAnalyst-Triage?]
Flags: needinfo?(jmitchell)
Keywords: qawanted
Nomming for 2.2 - seems too late to nom for 2.1 but this seems like some expected functionality that we should fix.
blocking-b2g: --- → 2.2?
QA Whiteboard: [QAnalyst-Triage?] → [QAnalyst-Triage+]
Flags: needinfo?(jmitchell)
Triage: blocking.
Assignee: nobody → gweng
blocking-b2g: 2.2? → 2.2+
Howie: Luke reminded me this is probably by-design: if user receive notification while it's "unlocked" (let's get rid of the confused "awake" in STR"), it's *should not* display on LockScreen, which is correct. And the seconds case, the system resending notifications after rebooting, is also correct. So this may be not a valid bug. Summary: 1. *without* LockScreen, received notifications *would NOT* display on LockScreen after pressing the power button twice 2. system *should* resend all unread notifications on LockScreen after rebooting 3. without unlocking, notifications on LockScreen *should* stay on the screen, no matter how you press the power button If there is a inconsistent consideration we should NI UX for more information.
Flags: needinfo?(hochang)
And unfortunately Howie is OOO.
Thanks Greg, remove the blocking status until further clarification. Hi Rob, can you check if this is by design based on Comment 5? Thank you.
blocking-b2g: 2.2+ → 2.2?
Flags: needinfo?(hochang) → needinfo?(rmacdonald)
Since Rob will be away for a while, ni Tiffanie for help, thanks.
Flags: needinfo?(rmacdonald) → needinfo?(tshakespeare)
Hello! I'm not going to be super helpful on this one so I'm passing the buck. Francis, Gordon, or Jacqueline should be able to help out. Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(tshakespeare)
Flags: needinfo?(jsavory)
Flags: needinfo?(gbrander)
Flags: needinfo?(fdjabri)
I'm afraid I can't find any relevant specs for this behavior on box, so I can't comment definitively, but this sounds like correct behaviour. Rob is back, so passing back over to him.
Flags: needinfo?(rmacdonald)
Flags: needinfo?(jsavory)
Flags: needinfo?(gbrander)
Flags: needinfo?(fdjabri)
Triage: still waiting for UX feedback.
I actually think we can take the assumption of comment 5 as a valid interpretation of the "correct" behavior and close this bug as INVALID.
Triage: agree INVALID as comment 5
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
blocking-b2g: 2.2? → -
Closed: 11 years ago
Flags: needinfo?(rmacdonald)
Resolution: --- → INVALID
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: