WebKit Bugzilla
New
Browse
Log In
×
Sign in with GitHub
or
Remember my login
Create Account
·
Forgot Password
Forgotten password account recovery
ASSIGNED
68278
http/tests/history/back-with-fragment-change.py fails
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68278
Summary
http/tests/history/back-with-fragment-change.py fails
Mihai Parparita
Reported
2011-09-16 13:31:44 PDT
Test landed in
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/95259
. See
bug 64556
for history of this issue.
Attachments
Patch
(10.22 KB, patch)
2011-09-16 15:56 PDT
,
Mihai Parparita
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch
(10.22 KB, patch)
2011-09-16 16:56 PDT
,
Mihai Parparita
darin
: review+
webkit.review.bot
: commit-queue-
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
expectations
(1.45 KB, patch)
2022-02-15 17:50 PST
,
Dawn Morningstar
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Show Obsolete
(1)
View All
Add attachment
proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Mihai Parparita
Comment 1
2011-09-16 13:44:08 PDT
Test was skipped with
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/95322
.
Mihai Parparita
Comment 2
2011-09-16 15:56:08 PDT
Created
attachment 107739
[details]
Patch
Adam Barth
Comment 3
2011-09-16 16:05:53 PDT
Comment on
attachment 107739
[details]
Patch View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=107739&action=review
> Source/WebCore/loader/FrameLoader.cpp:2301 > +// In cases where a load is not committed, undoes the speculative updating of > +// the current history item that's done by HistoryController::goToItem. > +void FrameLoader::undoSpeculativeBackForwardListUpdate()
Shouldn't this be a method of HistoryController since it interacts almost exclusively with HistoryController state?
Mihai Parparita
Comment 4
2011-09-16 16:15:45 PDT
(In reply to
comment #3
)
> Shouldn't this be a method of HistoryController since it interacts almost exclusively with HistoryController state?
Makes sense. Updated patch coming up.
Mihai Parparita
Comment 5
2011-09-16 16:56:25 PDT
Created
attachment 107747
[details]
Patch
Adam Barth
Comment 6
2011-09-16 17:02:14 PDT
This history stuff is somewhat mysterious to me. Probably fishd should review as our history expert.
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 7
2011-09-17 17:56:17 PDT
Comment on
attachment 107747
[details]
Patch
Attachment 107747
[details]
did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb): Output:
http://queues.webkit.org/results/9736381
New failing tests: http/tests/navigation/forward-and-cancel.html
David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)
Comment 8
2011-11-28 08:00:59 PST
<
rdar://problem/10490675
>
Eric Seidel (no email)
Comment 9
2012-05-21 15:10:37 PDT
I think you borked cr-linux? This is clearly an Adam/Nate review.
Darin Adler
Comment 10
2012-08-14 16:17:24 PDT
Comment on
attachment 107747
[details]
Patch View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=107747&action=review
> Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:11 > + navigated-to history item was cloberred by the same-document navigation.
typo: cloberred should be clobbered
> Source/WebCore/loader/HistoryController.cpp:549 > +void HistoryController::updateForProvisionalLoadStopped()
Should this function also set m_provisionalItem to 0? If so, you could remove that call from the one call site that does it separately and explicitly.
> Source/WebCore/loader/HistoryController.cpp:555 > + bool isTargetItem = m_provisionalItem ? m_provisionalItem->isTargetItem() : false;
You just moved this line of code, but I suggest writing it with && instead of the ternary operator. bool isTargetItem = m_provisionalItem && m_provisionalItem->isTargetItem();
> Source/WebCore/loader/HistoryController.cpp:558 > + if (HistoryItem* resetItem = mainFrame->loader()->history()->currentItem()) {
I find the variable name “reset item” to be a bit confusing. It sounds like a verb phrase to me.
> Source/WebCore/loader/HistoryController.h:73 > + void updateForProvisionalLoadStopped();
A better name for this would be updateForStoppedProvisionalLoad. For the record, I also think the function above should be renamed updateForCompletedFrameLoad. I think I understand why someone gave that a different name before, but it’s unnecessarily non-grammatical naming.
Simon Fraser (smfr)
Comment 11
2012-09-19 13:55:26 PDT
The test still fails.
Ádám Kallai
Comment 12
2013-02-14 06:38:49 PST
This test fails on Qt too. Is Anybody working on this bug?
Stephen Chenney
Comment 13
2013-04-09 05:43:54 PDT
There is nobody from Chromium working on this.
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 14
2013-05-22 15:44:07 PDT
What happened to this patch?
Darin Adler
Comment 15
2020-09-04 15:19:10 PDT
This test is marked as failing, not flaky, in TestExpectations but it’s not failing for me.
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 16
2020-09-04 16:37:56 PDT
There are a lot of failures (both flaky and consistent) on
https://results.webkit.org/?suite=layout-tests&test=http%2Ftests%2Fhistory%2Fback-with-fragment-change.php
Darin Adler
Comment 17
2020-09-04 16:58:58 PDT
So we should mark this as flaky, not as known failure.
Ryan Haddad
Comment 18
2020-09-08 16:33:03 PDT
Marked test as failing for mac-wk1, flaky for mac-wk2 in
http://trac.webkit.org/r266758
.
Dawn Morningstar
Comment 19
2022-02-15 17:50:21 PST
Created
attachment 452118
[details]
expectations
Robert Jenner
Comment 20
2022-02-15 17:56:06 PST
Comment on
attachment 452118
[details]
expectations Clearing flags on attachment: 452118 Committed
r289871
(?): <
https://commits.webkit.org/r289871
>
Dawn Morningstar
Comment 21
2022-02-15 17:57:28 PST
Re-added test expectations because they had been inadvertently removed.
Fujii Hironori
Comment 22
2023-10-31 23:09:36 PDT
http/tests/history/back-with-fragment-change.py
https://results.webkit.org/?suite=layout-tests&test=http%2Ftests%2Fhistory%2Fback-with-fragment-change.py
Mac WK1 is constantly failing, GTK and WPE WK2 is randomly failing.
https://build.webkit.org/results/GTK-Linux-64-bit-Debug-Tests/270007@main%20(11606)/http/tests/history/back-with-fragment-change-diff.txt
--- /home/buildbot/worker/GTK-Linux-64-bit-Debug-Tests/build/layout-test-results/http/tests/history/back-with-fragment-change-expected.txt +++ /home/buildbot/worker/GTK-Linux-64-bit-Debug-Tests/build/layout-test-results/http/tests/history/back-with-fragment-change-actual.txt @@ -4,6 +4,5 @@ ============== Back Forward List ==============
http://127.0.0.1:8000/history/back-with-fragment-change.py
**nav target** -
http://127.0.0.1:8000/history/resources/back-with-fragment-change-target.html
**nav target** curr->
http://127.0.0.1:8000/history/resources/back-with-fragment-change-target.html#foo
**nav target** ===============================================
Przemyslaw Gorszkowski
Comment 23
2024-06-19 04:35:31 PDT
I think this test case is not compliant with the specification:
https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/browsing-the-web.html#centralized-modifications-of-session-historyn
(the first example describes exactly the same case as is in this testcase). In my opinion (but please correct me if I am wrong) that the result of this test case should be: ============== Back Forward List ============== curr->
http://127.0.0.1:8000/history/back-with-fragment-change.py
**nav target** -
http://127.0.0.1:8000/history/resources/back-with-fragment-change-target.html
**nav target**
http://127.0.0.1:8000/history/resources/back-with-fragment-change-target.html#foo
**nav target** =============================================== Chrome and FireFox work in such way (at the end the back-with-fragment-change.py is displayed and due to deleting the sessionStorage.didNavigate; in function "done" of the back-with-fragment-change-target.html, the test case restarts).
Note
You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Top of Page
Format For Printing
XML
Clone This Bug