V8 differences from JSCore are really the only area where some extra
effort is needed. As Mark said, for the vast majority of tests we want
to use the WebCore from webkit.org, not chromium-win.
Yes, it sucks we have to put stuff in two places (chromium-win and
chromium-mac) but I don't see any other way around it. Also, the test
results should be more or less identical (at least they have been in
the cases I've seen), so it really is just copying the same file to
two places in the tree. The V8 differences are far far fewer in number
than the general pixel results.
What else would you propose?
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Dean McNamee <de...@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> I guess Mads's point here was that he works on V8, and when he wants
> to fix something for V8 (rebaseline), it's not clear to him where it
> should go. Should he copy it into all 3 places? The idea was maybe
> there should be a chromium-common (which is not chromium-win), where
> we can stick fallbacks where we know all platforms should match.
>
> It gets difficult to manage expectations across 3 platforms,
> especially when you think they should be the same. We've had that a
> lot now, someone stumbles over a broken test on Linux, and finds out
> that it was rebaselined on Windows already, etc. It's just confusing
> / a lot of work for someone like Mads's on the V8 team to know how to
> handle all 3 platforms differently...
>
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Thomas Van Lenten
> <thoma...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Dean McNamee <de...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Mark Mentovai <m...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>> > On the Mac, I think we want to match Apple WebKit baselines. I don't
>>> > know if there are any baselines currently in chromium-win that we
>>> > should share.
>>>
>>> All of the V8 differences, for example.
>>
>> We copy those into chromium-mac as needed. But the majority of the expected
>> files come down to fonts and the windows files wouldn't be of any use
>> there. In the pixel dumps, again, font and controls pretty much make using
>> the windows ones pointless.
>>
>> TVL
>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Mark
>>> >
>>> > Dean wrote:
>>> >> I talked to Mads a bit, basically:
>>> >>
>>> >> 1) I think the Mac expected result fallback is currently wrong, it
>>> >> doesn't seem to look in chromium-win correctly. This is probably
>>> >> causing a lot of failures.
>>> >>
>>> >> 2) We should move chromium-win to chromium (or chromium-common), and
>>> >> then chromium-win should not be a fallback. This might be more
>>> >> confusing to manage, but it's also less confusing to understand that
>>> >> everything should / can fallback to the Windows expectations.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Mads Sig Ager <a...@chromium.org>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It seems that when running layout tests on linux, if there are no
>>> >>> special expected results for linux in chromium-linux, we fallback to
>>> >>> the special expected results for windows in chromium-win. This is not
>>> >>> the case on mac if there are no results in chromium-mac, we take the
>>> >>> expectations that are next to the test even if there are other
>>> >>> expectations in chromium-win. Is that on purpose?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> A related question: what is the intention with our custom expected
>>> >>> resulsts? If we need to change the expectation for all three
>>> >>> platforms, should we only add the new expectations in chromium-win?
>>> >>> That sounds confusing to me. Maybe we should have a chromium-common?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Cheers, -- Mads
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>> >>
>>
>>
>
> >
>
--
Mike Pinkerton
Mac Weenie
pinker...@google.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
