Bug 256613
| Summary: | REGRESSION (263724@main): [ iOS macOS wk2 ] imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/screen-orientation/fullscreen-interactions.html is a flaky failure | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Karl Rackler <rackler> |
| Component: | New Bugs | Assignee: | Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | Normal | CC: | cdumez, marcosc, rniwa, webkit-bot-watchers-bugzilla, webkit-bug-importer |
| Priority: | P2 | Keywords: | InRadar |
| Version: | WebKit Nightly Build | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| See Also: | https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=256671 | ||
Karl Rackler
Description:
imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/screen-orientation/fullscreen-interactions.html
This is a consistent failure on iOS, a flaky failure on macOS debug wk2, and a consistent failure on macOS release wk2.
This issue can be bisected to 263724@main using command:
run-webkit-tests --release --iterations=1 --ios-simulator imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/screen-orientation/fullscreen-interactions.html
History:
https://results.webkit.org/?suite=layout-tests&test=imported%2Fw3c%2Fweb-platform-tests%2Fscreen-orientation%2Ffullscreen-interactions.html
Diff:
--- /Volumes/Data/worker/Apple-iOS-16-Simulator-Release-GPUProcess-WK2-Tests/build/layout-test-results/imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/screen-orientation/fullscreen-interactions-expected.txt
+++ /Volumes/Data/worker/Apple-iOS-16-Simulator-Release-GPUProcess-WK2-Tests/build/layout-test-results/imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/screen-orientation/fullscreen-interactions-actual.txt
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-FAIL Fully unlocking the screen orientation causes a pending lock to be aborted assert_unreached: Should have rejected: undefined Reached unreachable code
-FAIL Fully unlocking the screen orientation causes a pending lock in a nested browsing context to be aborted promise_rejects_dom: function "function () { throw e }" threw object "SecurityError: Locking the screen orientation is only allowed when in fullscreen" that is not a DOMException AbortError: property "code" is equal to 18, expected 20
+FAIL Fully unlocking the screen orientation causes a pending lock to be aborted promise_test: Unhandled rejection with value: object "TypeError: Type error"
+FAIL Fully unlocking the screen orientation causes a pending lock in a nested browsing context to be aborted promise_test: Unhandled rejection with value: object "TypeError: Type error"
| Attachments | ||
|---|---|---|
| Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc. |
Radar WebKit Bug Importer
<rdar://problem/109172161>
Karl Rackler
This appears to be a re-baseline.
Karl Rackler
Unsure if re-baseline will resolve this issue. I have marked this test as a failure while this issue is investigated.
EWS
Test gardening commit 263931@main (ea163072541f): <https://commits.webkit.org/263931@main>
Reviewed commits have been landed. Closing PR #13722 and removing active labels.
Ryosuke Niwa
There is nothing to be fixed here. We just need to ignore this console error message since it only appears intermittently.
Ryosuke Niwa
Pull request: https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/pull/13736
EWS
Committed 263945@main (79f43cff248f): <https://commits.webkit.org/263945@main>
Reviewed commits have been landed. Closing PR #13736 and removing active labels.
Alexey Proskuryakov
Note that this test was and remains a flaky failure on iOS simulator (where it actually matters).
Not the same as this bug, and I didn't check if we had a separate bug about that.
Ryosuke Niwa
(In reply to Alexey Proskuryakov from comment #8)
> Note that this test was and remains a flaky failure on iOS simulator (where
> it actually matters).
>
> Not the same as this bug, and I didn't check if we had a separate bug about
> that.
Yeah, I notice that now. I guess we should track it in a separate bug.
Ryosuke Niwa
(In reply to Ryosuke Niwa from comment #9)
> (In reply to Alexey Proskuryakov from comment #8)
> > Note that this test was and remains a flaky failure on iOS simulator (where
> > it actually matters).
> >
> > Not the same as this bug, and I didn't check if we had a separate bug about
> > that.
>
> Yeah, I notice that now. I guess we should track it in a separate bug.
Tracking this in the bug 256671.