NEW 231337
[ iOS 15 Debug ] imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/xhr/send-timeout-events.htm is a flaky failure 
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=231337
Summary [ iOS 15 Debug ] imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/xhr/send-timeout-events.htm ...
ayumi_kojima
Reported 2021-10-06 16:11:42 PDT
imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/xhr/send-timeout-events.htm Is flaky failing on iOS 15 Debug. History: https://results.webkit.org/?suite=layout-tests&test=imported%2Fw3c%2Fweb-platform-tests%2Fxhr%2Fsend-timeout-events.htm Diff: --- /Volumes/Data/worker/ios-simulator-15-debug-tests-wk2/build/layout-test-results/imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/xhr/send-timeout-events-expected.txt +++ /Volumes/Data/worker/ios-simulator-15-debug-tests-wk2/build/layout-test-results/imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/xhr/send-timeout-events-actual.txt @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ -PASS XMLHttpRequest: The send() method: timeout is not 0 +FAIL XMLHttpRequest: The send() method: timeout is not 0 assert_equals: expected 0 but got 857098
Attachments
Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Radar WebKit Bug Importer
Comment 1 2021-10-06 16:12:42 PDT
<rdar://problem/83956855>
ayumi_kojima
Comment 2 2021-10-06 16:16:20 PDT
Marked test expectations https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/283677/webkit
ayumi_kojima
Comment 3 2021-10-20 14:37:36 PDT
I was able to reproduce the failure locally on iOS 15 using run-webkit-tests --force --iterations 500 --exit-after-n-failures 1 --debug imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/xhr/send-timeout-events.htm --ios-simulator --no-timeout. The test failed with r269120 and passed with r269118 (r269119 is not available to test).
Jonathan Bedard
Comment 4 2021-10-21 08:03:04 PDT
(In reply to ayumi_kojima from comment #3) > I was able to reproduce the failure locally on iOS 15 using run-webkit-tests > --force --iterations 500 --exit-after-n-failures 1 --debug > imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/xhr/send-timeout-events.htm --ios-simulator > --no-timeout. > > The test failed with r269120 and passed with r269118 (r269119 is not > available to test). r269120 definitely can't cause a layout test failure like this, it didn't actually change anything about the binary you're testing.
ayumi_kojima
Comment 5 2021-11-03 12:02:19 PDT
I worked on reproduction again just to make sure. Test failed with r269121 and r269120 and passed with r269118 and r269117. So most likely it is either r269120 or r269119.
Ryan Haddad
Comment 6 2021-11-03 12:11:24 PDT
r269119 was a change on a branch, so it couldn't have affected trunk. r269120 was a rename of a directory used by buildbot, so it is also unlikely to have impacted test results. In spite of the reproduction, I still find this hard to believe.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.