159589 2016-07-08 17:19:51 -0700 REGRESSION (r202992?) [ios-sim] js/regress/varargs-call.html failing 2016-07-12 18:10:39 -0700 1 1 1 Unclassified WebKit New Bugs WebKit Nightly Build Unspecified Unspecified RESOLVED DUPLICATE 159616 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=159591 P2 Normal --- 1 ryanhaddad webkit-unassigned ap mark.lam oldest_to_newest 1209348 0 ryanhaddad 2016-07-08 17:19:51 -0700 [ios-sim] js/regress/varargs-call.html failing https://build.webkit.org/results/Apple%20iOS%209%20Simulator%20Release%20WK2%20(Tests)/r203006%20(7175)/results.html https://webkit-test-results.webkit.org/dashboards/flakiness_dashboard.html#showAllRuns=true&tests=js%2Fregress%2Fvarargs-call.html --- /Volumes/Data/slave/ios-simulator-9-release-tests-wk2/build/layout-test-results/js/regress/varargs-call-expected.txt +++ /Volumes/Data/slave/ios-simulator-9-release-tests-wk2/build/layout-test-results/js/regress/varargs-call-actual.txt @@ -1,10 +1,11 @@ +CONSOLE MESSAGE: line 8: RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded. JSRegress/varargs-call On success, you will see a series of "PASS" messages, followed by "TEST COMPLETE". -PASS no exception thrown -PASS successfullyParsed is true +FAIL caught exception: RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded. +FAIL successfullyParsed should be true (of type boolean). Was undefined (of type undefined). TEST COMPLETE 1209352 1 ryanhaddad 2016-07-08 17:22:32 -0700 Possibly related to https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/202992, but I'm not sure. 1210237 2 ap 2016-07-12 16:38:28 -0700 Mark, could you please take a look? 1210243 3 mark.lam 2016-07-12 16:48:47 -0700 (In reply to comment #1) > Possibly related to https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/202992, but I'm not > sure. https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/202992 is just a renaming patch. There is no semantic difference. It is highly unlikely that it caused this regression. 1210248 4 ap 2016-07-12 16:54:43 -0700 http://trac.webkit.org/r203067 seems more likely to have changed behavior. When did the problem occur for the first time? 1210252 5 mark.lam 2016-07-12 16:57:30 -0700 (In reply to comment #4) > http://trac.webkit.org/r203067 seems more likely to have changed behavior. > When did the problem occur for the first time? Note: http://trac.webkit.org/r203067 landed after r203006 which is the version that this failed test result is reported against: https://build.webkit.org/results/Apple%20iOS%209%20Simulator%20Release%20WK2%20(Tests)/r203006%20(7175)/results.html Regardless, I will take a look. More likely that the test itself is bad and may need to be modified to behave well. I doubt this is due to a bug in the landed patches. 1210255 6 mark.lam 2016-07-12 16:58:43 -0700 (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > http://trac.webkit.org/r203067 seems more likely to have changed behavior. > > When did the problem occur for the first time? > > Note: http://trac.webkit.org/r203067 landed after r203006 which is the > version that this failed test result is reported against: > https://build.webkit.org/results/ > Apple%20iOS%209%20Simulator%20Release%20WK2%20(Tests)/r203006%20(7175)/ > results.html > > Regardless, I will take a look. More likely that the test itself is bad and > may need to be modified to behave well. I doubt this is due to a bug in the > landed patches. BTW, I just learned yesterday that http://trac.webkit.org/r203067 doesn't even take effect on the iOS SIM layout tests yet because I have to make some changes to LTRelayController (to be landed soon). So, http://trac.webkit.org/r203067 is definitely not it. 1210290 7 mark.lam 2016-07-12 18:05:15 -0700 I can't reproduce this with an iOS Sim debug build. 1210292 8 ap 2016-07-12 18:10:39 -0700 It's already fixed! Ryan, could you please unmark the test? *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 159616 ***