Bug 159589 – REGRESSION (r202992?) [ios-sim] js/regress/varargs-call.html failing

• Component: New Bugs
• Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE

[Ryan Haddad]

[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

[Ryan Haddad]

Possibly related to https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/202992, but I'm not sure.

[Alexey Proskuryakov]

Mark, could you please take a look?

[Mark Lam]

(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.

[Alexey Proskuryakov]

http://trac.webkit.org/r203067 seems more likely to have changed behavior. When did the problem occur for the first time?

[Mark Lam]

(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.

[Mark Lam]

(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.

[Mark Lam]

I can't reproduce this with an iOS Sim debug build.

[Alexey Proskuryakov]

It's already fixed!

Ryan, could you please unmark the test?

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 159616 ***