Run Wd tests in headless mode
Categories
(Testing :: geckodriver, defect, P1)
Tracking
(firefox69 fixed)
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox69 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: ato, Assigned: whimboo)
References
(Depends on 3 open bugs, Blocks 2 open bugs)
Details
Attachments
(4 files, 1 obsolete file)
(deleted),
patch
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review | |
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details | |
Bug 1493907 - [wdspec] Mark remaining failing tests as expected fail for headless mode. r=#webdriver
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details | |
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details |
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 3•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Comment 6•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 7•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 15•6 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 16•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 17•6 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 18•6 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 19•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 20•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 21•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 22•5 years ago
|
||
Joel, what's our current situation with headless tests? I know that you disabled a lot of them, so I wonder if we still want to run those, and if yes, on which platforms. Maybe that helps us to get the wdspec ones landed easier.
Comment 23•5 years ago
|
||
headless tests are only run to ensure compatibility of headless mode, not to run in parallel or to safe resources. If there is a future investment into headless mode to make it support more of our needs for tests, then we could look at running normal tests as tier-2 and headless as tier-1 taking advantage of the faster runtime and possibility of parallel execution.
Reporter | ||
Comment 24•5 years ago
|
||
Given those constraints, running Wd
in headless makes sense as
users are relying on using headless WebDriver and we want to avoid
any regressions in that area.
I should also add that—although not intended to be—Wd
is probably
the best regression test suite we have for headless mode, considering
its scope is to ensure all things related to browser automation
works.
Assignee | ||
Comment 25•5 years ago
|
||
Andreas, we could try to get the headless tests added, and simply mark those tests as expected fail where we know those are failing due to broken behavior in Firefox. I hope that those shouldn't be that many affected tests.
Enabling headless is important before we can get started with bug 1560181.
I just pushed a try build:
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=db4d725fb86b5294d0d24e05d64ea9271644098a
Comment 26•5 years ago
|
||
Try run is looking better with a patch:
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=4b90f83a778aa26f792f0f8d94478e8834a96511
Still have one more failure:
TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | /webdriver/tests/get_window_rect/get.py | test_payload - AssertionError: assert {'height': 60...x': 0, 'y': 0} == {'height': 600...100, 'y': 100}
Reporter | ||
Comment 27•5 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Henrik Skupin (:whimboo) [⌚️UTC+2] from comment #25)
Andreas, we could try to get the headless tests added, and simply
mark those tests as expected fail where we know those are failing
due to broken behavior in Firefox. I hope that those shouldn't be
that many affected tests.
Perfect! I agree with that approach.
(In reply to Brendan Dahl [:bdahl] from comment #26)
Try run is looking better with a patch:
Lovely, thanks for pitching in!
Assignee | ||
Comment 28•5 years ago
|
||
Note, that I will wait a bit more before marking tests as expected fail. After talking to Brendan yesterday he has to do some more verification if his patch doesn't produce any regression (which did happen in the past). If all goes well, we might be able to run nearly all the tests, which is fantastic!
Assignee | ||
Comment 29•5 years ago
|
||
Brendan, please let me know if there is something I could help with. We would appreciate if we could get at least the recent patch landed.
Assignee | ||
Comment 31•5 years ago
|
||
Wonderful. Thanks a lot again. I will have a look once it landed, what the remaining test failure is related to, and if it's even a bug in the test.
Assignee | ||
Comment 32•5 years ago
|
||
So I investigated the two remaining failing tests. The payload one for GetWindowRect
was just poorly written. After refactoring it, it works fine. For the negative coordinates test I filed bug 1563161, and will mark the test as expected fail for now when run under headless.
Assignee | ||
Comment 33•5 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 34•5 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 35•5 years ago
|
||
Depends on D36723
Assignee | ||
Comment 36•5 years ago
|
||
Depends on D36724
Assignee | ||
Comment 37•5 years ago
|
||
Depends on D36725
Updated•5 years ago
|
Updated•5 years ago
|
Comment 38•5 years ago
|
||
Comment 39•5 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/0609705a3472
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/d62f57d8e0b7
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/60ee55f4c31d
Comment 46•5 years ago
|
||
Comment 47•5 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Description
•