Closed
Bug 1386412
Opened 7 years ago
Closed 7 years ago
Perma failure when 56 merges to beta in browser_service_workers_multi_content_process.js | Test timed out -
Categories
(DevTools :: about:debugging, defect, P3)
DevTools
about:debugging
Tracking
(firefox56 fixed, firefox57 fixed)
RESOLVED
FIXED
Firefox 57
People
(Reporter: aryx, Assigned: jdescottes)
References
Details
(Keywords: intermittent-failure)
Attachments
(1 file)
Merge is tomorrow (August 2nd) Failure log: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/logviewer.html#?job_id=119734413&repo=try TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_service_workers_multi_content_process.js | Test timed out - TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_service_workers_push.js | The service-workers url appears in the list: http://example.com/browser/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/service-workers/empty-sw.js - Got false, expected true
Flags: needinfo?(jdescottes)
Reporter | ||
Updated•7 years ago
|
Summary: Perma failure when 56 merges to beta in → Perma failure when 56 merges to beta in browser_service_workers_multi_content_process.js | Test timed out -
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•7 years ago
|
||
Are you sure about the perma failure? From what I see in the central as beta push https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=b47de49ad58a9f315a1a6ddcbe3c8fbd5db1a38d&selectedJob=119734009, there are successful jobs where this test doesn't fail. Given that this test is already intermittent, are we sure it's a blocker?
Flags: needinfo?(jdescottes) → needinfo?(aryx.bugmail)
Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•7 years ago
|
||
This patch should normally address intermittents from Bug 1340199 and Bug 1349121
Comment 4•7 years ago
|
||
mozreview-review |
Comment on attachment 8892832 [details] Bug 1386412 - fix race conditions in browser_service_workers_multi_content_process.js; https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/163830/#review169184 Thanks for chasing this intermittent. It looks like there migh be other suspicious usages of waitForMutation: http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_page_not_found.js#24 http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_service_workers_push_service.js#97 http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_service_workers_status.js#46 http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_service_workers_timeout.js#66 That makes me wonder if we should warn from eslint usages of "yield waitForXXXX"... but unfortunately, some usages are valid. ::: devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_service_workers_multi_content_process.js:30 (Diff revision 1) > + let onMutation = waitForMutation(serviceWorkersElement, { childList: true }); > + > + let swTab = yield addTab(TAB_URL, { background: true }); > > - yield waitForMutation(serviceWorkersElement, { childList: true }); > + info("Wait for service worker to appear in the list"); > + yield onMutation; If that's what caused this intermittent, it looks like there is other potential intermittents: http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_service_workers.js#20 http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_service_workers_fetch_flag.js#18 http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/browser_service_workers_timeout.js#23
Attachment #8892832 -
Flags: review?(poirot.alex) → review+
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•7 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Julian Descottes [:jdescottes] from comment #1) > Are you sure about the perma failure? The test failed on Linux x64 and Windows 7, both on opt and pgo (which is an opt). These are at least 5 failures for this in pne test run: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=b47de49ad58a9f315a1a6ddcbe3c8fbd5db1a38d&filter-searchStr=devtools%20e10s&filter-resultStatus=testfailed&filter-resultStatus=busted&filter-resultStatus=exception&filter-resultStatus=retry&filter-resultStatus=usercancel&filter-resultStatus=running&filter-resultStatus=pending&filter-resultStatus=runnable&selectedJob=119781861
Flags: needinfo?(aryx.bugmail)
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•7 years ago
|
||
Thanks for the review! I forgot to mention but I did a few try pushes to confirm if this was useful. First the central as beta simulation without my patch: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=221c12eb40bfd6e9d04936c5b2aea085fa39aba1 we can see frequent dt9 failures, for the timeout issue mentioned. Then same simulation with a first version of my patch: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=ffea93d1a821c5bd2ab567dc548c033941514a52 still a dt9 failure (but less frequent) and failing later in the test Finally a last test with a patch also trying to fix the issue found in the second try push: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=482f6a8b794cc4558e9bb6274a8b9fbb6b28d9f6 (I did this last one based off central, instead of the beta simulation, so the chunk was dt8 instead of dt9) (In reply to Alexandre Poirot [:ochameau] from comment #4) > Comment on attachment 8892832 [details] > Bug 1386412 - fix race conditions in > browser_service_workers_multi_content_process.js; > > https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/163830/#review169184 > > Thanks for chasing this intermittent. > > It looks like there migh be other suspicious usages of waitForMutation: > http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/ > test/browser_page_not_found.js#24 > http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/ > test/browser_service_workers_push_service.js#97 > http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/ > test/browser_service_workers_status.js#46 > http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/ > test/browser_service_workers_timeout.js#66 > > That makes me wonder if we should warn from eslint usages of "yield > waitForXXXX"... > but unfortunately, some usages are valid. Do you have any example in mind? > > ::: > devtools/client/aboutdebugging/test/ > browser_service_workers_multi_content_process.js:30 > (Diff revision 1) > > + let onMutation = waitForMutation(serviceWorkersElement, { childList: true }); > > + > > + let swTab = yield addTab(TAB_URL, { background: true }); > > > > - yield waitForMutation(serviceWorkersElement, { childList: true }); > > + info("Wait for service worker to appear in the list"); > > + yield onMutation; > > If that's what caused this intermittent, it looks like there is other > potential intermittents: > http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/ > test/browser_service_workers.js#20 > http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/ > test/browser_service_workers_fetch_flag.js#18 > http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/client/aboutdebugging/ > test/browser_service_workers_timeout.js#23 I'll file a follow up to cleanup other about:debugging tests. The pattern is racy anyway, I guess depending on the test they are more or less likely to fail, but fixing it shouldn't hurt.
Pushed by jdescottes@mozilla.com: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/0bf2574ad9ff fix race conditions in browser_service_workers_multi_content_process.js;r=ochameau
Comment 8•7 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/0bf2574ad9ff
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
status-firefox57:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 57
Comment 9•7 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/00ead85af43b
status-firefox56:
--- → fixed
Comment hidden (Intermittent Failures Robot) |
Updated•6 years ago
|
Product: Firefox → DevTools
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•