Intermittent "assertion count 1 is more than expected 0" in crashtests/284852.html from "ASSERTION: invalid BC damage area: 'PR_FALSE'"

RESOLVED FIXED

Status

()

defect
RESOLVED FIXED
9 years ago
7 years ago

People

(Reporter: philor, Unassigned)

Tracking

({intermittent-failure})

Trunk
x86
Windows Server 2003
Points:
---
Dependency tree / graph

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Reporter

Description

9 years ago
http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=Firefox/1278277438.1278278564.30824.gz
WINNT 5.2 mozilla-central debug test crashtest on 2010/07/04 14:03:58
s: win32-slave16

REFTEST TEST-START | file:///e:/builds/moz2_slave/mozilla-central-win32-debug-unittest-crashtest/build/reftest/tests/layout/tables/crashtests/284852.html
++DOMWINDOW == 72 (05B8D6C8) [serial = 2878] [outer = 052F8990]
###!!! ASSERTION: invalid BC damage area: 'PR_FALSE', file e:/builds/moz2_slave/mozilla-central-win32-debug/build/layout/tables/nsTableFrame.cpp, line 3760
REFTEST TEST-PASS | file:///e:/builds/moz2_slave/mozilla-central-win32-debug-unittest-crashtest/build/reftest/tests/layout/tables/crashtests/284852.html | (LOAD ONLY)
REFTEST INFO | Loading a blank page
++DOMWINDOW == 73 (07084390) [serial = 2879] [outer = 052F8990]
REFTEST TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | file:///e:/builds/moz2_slave/mozilla-central-win32-debug-unittest-crashtest/build/reftest/tests/layout/tables/crashtests/284852.html | assertion count 1 is more than expected 0 assertions
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 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 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 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 28

8 years ago
the initial  assertion has gone and I hope the underlying issue also due to bug 460637 however we habe entries past the checkin so please indicate which assert has been triggered.
Reporter

Comment 29

8 years ago
We do? Looks like that hit inbound sometime during the evening of 2011-11-27, central the morning of 2011-11-28, and we haven't seen this since 2011-11-21. That sounds like "fixed by bug 460637" to me.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED

Comment 30

8 years ago
yes, I looked at a try run ;-)
Whiteboard: [orange]
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.