RESOLVED FIXED 153181
Modern IDB: .js test files should not log database names 
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153181
Summary Modern IDB: .js test files should not log database names
Brady Eidson
Reported 2016-01-15 21:47:47 PST
Modern IDB: .js test files should not log database names This is because the database name will be different based on if the html for the test changes filename, which will happen in https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153179
Attachments
Patch v1 (143.18 KB, patch)
2016-01-15 22:05 PST, Brady Eidson 		achristensen: review+
buildbot: commit-queue-
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
Archive of layout-test-results from ews107 for mac-yosemite-wk2 (894.77 KB, application/zip)
2016-01-15 22:52 PST, Build Bot 		no flags
Details
Archive of layout-test-results from ews101 for mac-yosemite (747.53 KB, application/zip)
2016-01-15 22:54 PST, Build Bot 		no flags
Details
Archive of layout-test-results from ews116 for mac-yosemite (791.83 KB, application/zip)
2016-01-15 23:00 PST, Build Bot 		no flags
Details
Patch for EWS then landing (170.65 KB, patch)
2016-01-16 21:59 PST, Brady Eidson 		no flags
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
Show Obsolete (3) View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Brady Eidson
Comment 1 2016-01-15 21:55:51 PST
This will be one simple change to a shared js file, followed by lots of updated test results.
Brady Eidson
Comment 2 2016-01-15 22:05:50 PST
Created attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1
Alex Christensen
Comment 3 2016-01-15 22:24:04 PST
Comment on attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1 But if we're going to have two identical copies of all the w3c tests, why don't we do the same with these? r=me if not. These include some imported mozilla tests. Are there more mozilla tests, or will we ever re-import those?
Build Bot
Comment 4 2016-01-15 22:52:44 PST
Comment on attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1 Attachment 269151 [details] did not pass mac-wk2-ews (mac-wk2): Output: http://webkit-queues.webkit.org/results/697352 Number of test failures exceeded the failure limit.
Build Bot
Comment 5 2016-01-15 22:52:46 PST
Created attachment 269152 [details] Archive of layout-test-results from ews107 for mac-yosemite-wk2 The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-wk2-ews. Bot: ews107 Port: mac-yosemite-wk2 Platform: Mac OS X 10.10.5
Build Bot
Comment 6 2016-01-15 22:54:17 PST
Comment on attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1 Attachment 269151 [details] did not pass mac-ews (mac): Output: http://webkit-queues.webkit.org/results/697354 New failing tests: storage/indexeddb/request-result-cache.html
Build Bot
Comment 7 2016-01-15 22:54:20 PST
Created attachment 269153 [details] Archive of layout-test-results from ews101 for mac-yosemite The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-ews. Bot: ews101 Port: mac-yosemite Platform: Mac OS X 10.10.5
Build Bot
Comment 8 2016-01-15 23:00:27 PST
Comment on attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1 Attachment 269151 [details] did not pass mac-debug-ews (mac): Output: http://webkit-queues.webkit.org/results/697346 New failing tests: storage/indexeddb/request-result-cache.html
Build Bot
Comment 9 2016-01-15 23:00:29 PST
Created attachment 269154 [details] Archive of layout-test-results from ews116 for mac-yosemite The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-debug-ews. Bot: ews116 Port: mac-yosemite Platform: Mac OS X 10.10.5
Alex Christensen
Comment 10 2016-01-16 11:46:52 PST
And we will need more test expectations for the private tests anyways. Couldn't those just have a different name in the expectations?
Brady Eidson
Comment 11 2016-01-16 19:19:53 PST
(In reply to comment #3) > Comment on attachment 269151 [details] > Patch v1 > > But if we're going to have two identical copies of all the w3c tests, why > don't we do the same with these? r=me if not. Because having the two identical copies of the w3c tests is *not* ideal. It would be ideal if every single test had a common js file with two thin html wrappers. That way any edits to the tests involve touching one js file and not two html files. That's what this patch is moving towards. > These include some imported mozilla tests. Are there more mozilla tests, or > will we ever re-import those? These were "imported" a long time ago old style; manually and piecemeal. If we ever import any other tests they'll go into a fresh imported/* directory. (In reply to comment #10) > And we will need more test expectations for the private tests anyways. > Couldn't those just have a different name in the expectations? It's a more full proof "import" to the private copy when the expectations file can just copy over with no edits. The DB name doesn't add anything, anyways - I see no reason to argue for its preservation.
Alex Christensen
Comment 12 2016-01-16 20:23:57 PST
Ok, sounds good
Brady Eidson
Comment 13 2016-01-16 21:59:22 PST
Created attachment 269186 [details] Patch for EWS then landing
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 14 2016-01-17 00:13:43 PST
Comment on attachment 269186 [details] Patch for EWS then landing Clearing flags on attachment: 269186 Committed r195181: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/195181>
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.