Bug 216373 – Followup to Bug 215027: address comments to improve APP_BOUND_DOMAINS macro use

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: FIXED
• Component: WebKit Misc.

[Kate Cheney]

This is a followup to Bug 215027 to address Darin's comments to improve the use of the APP_BOUND_DOMAINS macro.

<rdar://problem/68645704>

[Kate Cheney]

Created attachment 408465 [details]
Patch

[Darin Adler]

Comment on attachment 408465 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=408465&action=review

> LayoutTests/platform/wk2/TestExpectations:732
> +# App Bound Domains is for iOS only, so we should skip
> +# them here and enable them in the iOS platform specific file.
> +http/tests/resourceLoadStatistics/exemptDomains/ [ Skip ]

I suggest putting this into TestExpectations, rather than platform/wk2/TestExpectations. Will that work?

[Kate Cheney]

(In reply to Darin Adler from comment #2)
> Comment on attachment 408465 [details]
> Patch
> 
> View in context:
> https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=408465&action=review
> 
> > LayoutTests/platform/wk2/TestExpectations:732
> > +# App Bound Domains is for iOS only, so we should skip
> > +# them here and enable them in the iOS platform specific file.
> > +http/tests/resourceLoadStatistics/exemptDomains/ [ Skip ]
> 
> I suggest putting this into TestExpectations, rather than
> platform/wk2/TestExpectations. Will that work?

Maybe. All of http/tests/resourceLoadStatistics/ is currently set to 'pass' in LayoutTests/platform/wk2/TestExpectations, which overwrites the 'skip' for http/tests/resourceLoadStatistics/exemptDomains/ in LayoutTests/TestExpectations.

I could set http/tests/resourceLoadStatistics/ to 'pass' in LayoutTests/TestExpectations instead of LayoutTests/platform/wk2/TestExpectations but then would have to edit all non-cocoa platform files to skip resourceLoadStatistics/ tests, which seems just as inelegant. Maybe you see a better option though?

[Darin Adler]

(In reply to katherine_cheney from comment #3)
> Maybe you see a better option though?

No, I guess that means my idea won’t work. Sorry, I could have figured that out if I thought more carefully about your earlier comments.

[Kate Cheney]

(In reply to Darin Adler from comment #4)
> (In reply to katherine_cheney from comment #3)
> > Maybe you see a better option though?
> 
> No, I guess that means my idea won’t work. Sorry, I could have figured that
> out if I thought more carefully about your earlier comments.

No problem.


Looks like I need to rebase to resolve a conflict in the ios-wk2 TestExpectation file to make the gtk and wincairo bots happy. I'll re-upload and confirm the bots are all green before landing.

[Kate Cheney]

Created attachment 408481 [details]
Patch

[Kate Cheney]

Created attachment 408538 [details]
Patch for landing

[EWS]

Committed r266929: <https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/266929>

All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug and clearing flags on attachment 408538 [details].