Bug 54855 – Let NRWT print a detailed summary of expected results

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: WONTFIX
• Component: Tools / Tests

[Xianzhu Wang]

I've found that a detailed summary of expected results is useful to me to understand the situation of current expectations.

I propose an option '--print=detailed-expected' which behaves like '--print=expected' but gives detailed summary of each combination of expectations of each type.

An example output is as follows:

Found:  23149 tests
Expect: 13564 passes   (13500 now,   64 wontfix)
Expect:   821 failures (  756 now,   65 wontfix)
            1 failures (    1 now,    0 wontfix) CRASH
          252 failures (  207 now,   45 wontfix) FAIL
           94 failures (   94 now,    0 wontfix) IMAGE
           71 failures (   61 now,   10 wontfix) IMAGE+TEXT
            1 failures (    1 now,    0 wontfix) MISSING
          390 failures (  381 now,    9 wontfix) TEXT
           12 failures (   11 now,    1 wontfix) TIMEOUT
Expect:   150 flaky    (  149 now,    1 wontfix)
            4 flaky    (    4 now,    0 wontfix) FAIL CRASH
            3 flaky    (    3 now,    0 wontfix) FAIL TIMEOUT
            3 flaky    (    3 now,    0 wontfix) IMAGE IMAGE+TEXT
            2 flaky    (    2 now,    0 wontfix) IMAGE+TEXT CRASH
           17 flaky    (   17 now,    0 wontfix) PASS CRASH
            6 flaky    (    5 now,    1 wontfix) PASS FAIL
            1 flaky    (    1 now,    0 wontfix) PASS FAIL CRASH
            1 flaky    (    1 now,    0 wontfix) PASS FAIL TIMEOUT
            1 flaky    (    1 now,    0 wontfix) PASS FAIL TIMEOUT CRASH
           21 flaky    (   21 now,    0 wontfix) PASS IMAGE
            2 flaky    (    2 now,    0 wontfix) PASS IMAGE IMAGE+TEXT
            5 flaky    (    5 now,    0 wontfix) PASS IMAGE+TEXT
            1 flaky    (    1 now,    0 wontfix) PASS MISSING
           38 flaky    (   38 now,    0 wontfix) PASS TEXT
            2 flaky    (    2 now,    0 wontfix) PASS TEXT CRASH
            7 flaky    (    7 now,    0 wontfix) PASS TEXT TIMEOUT
            2 flaky    (    2 now,    0 wontfix) PASS TEXT TIMEOUT CRASH
           21 flaky    (   21 now,    0 wontfix) PASS TIMEOUT
            1 flaky    (    1 now,    0 wontfix) PASS TIMEOUT CRASH
            3 flaky    (    3 now,    0 wontfix) TEXT CRASH
            1 flaky    (    1 now,    0 wontfix) TEXT IMAGE IMAGE+TEXT
            3 flaky    (    3 now,    0 wontfix) TEXT IMAGE+TEXT
            2 flaky    (    2 now,    0 wontfix) TEXT MISSING
            3 flaky    (    3 now,    0 wontfix) TEXT TIMEOUT
Expect:  8614 skipped  (  400 now, 8214 wontfix)
          175 skipped  (   41 now,  134 wontfix) FAIL
            1 skipped  (    0 now,    1 wontfix) FAIL IMAGE
           53 skipped  (    1 now,   52 wontfix) FAIL TIMEOUT
            2 skipped  (    0 now,    2 wontfix) IMAGE+TEXT
         1663 skipped  (    2 now, 1661 wontfix) PASS
          395 skipped  (  212 now,  183 wontfix) PASS FAIL
          267 skipped  (    2 now,  265 wontfix) PASS FAIL TIMEOUT
            5 skipped  (    5 now,    0 wontfix) PASS TIMEOUT
            1 skipped  (    1 now,    0 wontfix) PASS TIMEOUT CRASH
         5740 skipped  (   14 now, 5726 wontfix) TEXT
            2 skipped  (    1 now,    1 wontfix) TEXT TIMEOUT
            1 skipped  (    1 now,    0 wontfix) TEXT TIMEOUT CRASH
          308 skipped  (  120 now,  188 wontfix) TIMEOUT
            1 skipped  (    0 now,    1 wontfix) TIMEOUT CRASH

[Xianzhu Wang]

Created attachment 83134 [details]
patch

[Xianzhu Wang]

Created attachment 83136 [details]
patch with unit test

This patch contains only unit test for printing.py, but not test_runner.py as much work is needed to make the related part of it testable which can be done later.

[Dirk Pranke]

Comment on attachment 83136 [details]
patch with unit test

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=83136&action=review

> Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/layout_tests/layout_package/test_runner.py:897
> +                details[expectation]['now' if test in now else 'wontfix'] += 1

Nit: We don't often use the ternary operator in our code, so you might be better off rewriting this as an if loop. But it's kind of a judgement call. I hate to ban a perfectly good python construct for now real reason.

Technically, the patch looks fine.

However, I wonder how useful this output will really be to anyone but you. I've increasingly found myself thinking that new-run-webkit-tests has too many knobs for displaying statistics different ways, and we log too many statistics and too much stuff in our verbose output. One could easily already argue that no one but me (and maybe one or two other people) know what all the existing --print options do, let alone what another added one would do.

So, while not intending to directly derail this patch, I'd like to ask what you're using these numbers for? Is there some other way we could be getting these numbers that wouldn't require additional command line flags, or for this stuff to be computed and logged at runtime on every run?

For example, do you really need this to be printed on every run? Or is this something that you just want to track occasionally, as a report, or something like that. Or is it perhaps better to generate this as a dashboard report across revisions, without actually running NRWT (since this data can be generated statically) (Much like the LTTF dashboard I wrote that you've probably never seen does).

Or is it maybe better to have RWT output a full table of test results in some form for a run, that can then be post-processed into whatever format you want? 

What do others think?

[Dirk Pranke]

(cc'ing a few other people who might care one way or another) ...

[Ojan Vafai]

I agree with Dirk. We spew out way too much already. How do you use this data in a way that is more helpful than just grepping the test_expectations file?

[Xianzhu Wang]

(In reply to comment #3)

Thanks Dirk and Ojan for your replies.

I want to get reports from time to time with or without actually running NRWT. Post-processing the output of '--print trace-everything' seems better than what this patch does. I'd close this bug.

[Ojan Vafai]

You can probably get most of the data you want from the JSON files that the bot generates (it's just a JSON form of test_expectations.txt). You should be able to generate all this data with that one file and a local checkout.

http://test-results.appspot.com/testfile?name=expectations.json