172034 2017-05-12 10:11:54 -0700 [macOS Sierra Release] LayoutTest webrtc/closing-peerconnection.html is a flaky timeout. 2017-05-12 10:48:22 -0700 1 1 1 Unclassified WebKit New Bugs WebKit Nightly Build Unspecified Unspecified NEW P2 Normal --- 1 jlewis3 webkit-unassigned youennf oldest_to_newest 1307913 0 jlewis3 2017-05-12 10:11:54 -0700 The test webrtc/closing-peerconnection.html is a flaky timeout on Sierra Release Wk2. This doesn't appear to be a recent regression. The test was last edited in https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/215558/webkit History: https://webkit-test-results.webkit.org/dashboards/flakiness_dashboard.html#showAllRuns=true&tests=webrtc%2Fclosing-peerconnection.html Build: https://build.webkit.org/builders/Apple%20Sierra%20Release%20WK2%20(Tests)/builds/1418 https://build.webkit.org/results/Apple%20Sierra%20Release%20WK2%20(Tests)/r216765%20(1418)/results.html Diff: --- /Volumes/Data/slave/sierra-release-tests-wk2/build/layout-test-results/webrtc/closing-peerconnection-expected.txt +++ /Volumes/Data/slave/sierra-release-tests-wk2/build/layout-test-results/webrtc/closing-peerconnection-actual.txt @@ -1,3 +1,5 @@ +#PID UNRESPONSIVE - com.apple.WebKit.WebContent.Development (pid 24347) +FAIL: Timed out waiting for notifyDone to be called -PASS closing and stopping peer connection in the middle of gathering candidates - +#EOF +#EOF 1307916 1 jlewis3 2017-05-12 10:15:35 -0700 Marked test as flaky. https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/216767/webkit 1307934 2 youennf 2017-05-12 10:39:43 -0700 (In reply to Matt Lewis from comment #1) > Marked test as flaky. > https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/216767/webkit I think it is fine to create a bugzilla for it and CC me. Adding the TestExpectation too quickly hinder the possibility to catch regressions if the test starts to always time out. We need to find the right balance between raising too many false alarms and missing true alarms. In that particular case, I would think we should add the test expectation only if is timing out a few times. Not sure if there are some kinds of rule for that. 1307937 3 jlewis3 2017-05-12 10:48:22 -0700 (In reply to youenn fablet from comment #2) > (In reply to Matt Lewis from comment #1) > > Marked test as flaky. > > https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/216767/webkit > > I think it is fine to create a bugzilla for it and CC me. > Adding the TestExpectation too quickly hinder the possibility to catch > regressions if the test starts to always time out. > We need to find the right balance between raising too many false alarms and > missing true alarms. > > In that particular case, I would think we should add the test expectation > only if is timing out a few times. > > Not sure if there are some kinds of rule for that. Sure thing! I'll keep that in mind!