1624381 - Report Java exceptions via the crash reporter

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Firefox for Android Graveyard :: Testing, enhancement, P3)

Description

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

In bug 1624210 we were tracking the necessary changes to handle the new RuntimeExceptions for networking failures. It seems we may be able to do so via forced crashes which take advantage of our existing infrastructure to handle reporting failures due to crashes. I'm going ahead and assigning this to snorp who is already working on a patch.

Should this be for all RuntimeExceptions reported in Geckoview TestRunnerActivity or just the new networking ones?

snorp: Coordinate with gbrown and myself so we can make sure we are hitting all the bases in terms of treeherder integration.

Comment 1

[Geoff Brown [:gbrown]]

In bug 1603499, my understanding (assumption?) was that any uncaught Java exception would trigger a minidump and .extra file with java_stack.

Comment 2

[James Willcox (:snorp) ([e-mail]) (he/him)]

Attachment: Bug 1624381 - Report Java crashes via Gecko in TestRunnerActivity

We need this to ensure Java crashes are handled correctly in automation.

Comment 3

[James Willcox (:snorp) ([e-mail]) (he/him)]

(In reply to Geoff Brown [:gbrown] (reduced availability) from comment #1)

In bug 1603499, my understanding (assumption?) was that any uncaught Java exception would trigger a minidump and .extra file with java_stack.

That was true with Fennec, but not with TestRunnerActivity. This patch makes it so.

Comment 4

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

Try hasn't been successful in reproducing the networking issue for me. We might as well go ahead and see how it plays in production.

Comment 5

[Stefan Arentz | :st3fan | ⏰ EST | he/him]

Making this a P3 so that it does not show up as a critical Fennec issue.

Comment 6

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

Is this ability to report java crashes as normal crashes restricted to the use of TestRunnerActivity. Does this cover all of our testing scenarios? Doesn't raptor use geckview_example and would it be covered with this?

Comment 7

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

The new assertion was removed in Bug 1624715.