On 08.01.2010, at 11:56, Eric Seidel wrote:
I think that having this particular test enabled is much more
important than
having the patch it was affecting landed.
Agreed. But, I think it's inexcusable for a test to affect later
results. I skipped it more on those grounds than that the test it was
enabling was important.
It's not clear where the bug is though. If there is an uninitialized
memory read in a later test, then earlier tests that randomly affect
it can be perfectly correct. The fact that on other platforms the
problem was not fixed support this hypothesis to some degree.
The opposite is sometimes true, as well - there were whole series of
randomly crashing tests added to Skipped list by different persons,
even though the fault lied with an earlier test.
As I said before, it's good when flaky tests cause pain and impede
progress (as long as those tests are correct, of course). That's their
way of making us investigate problems which can quickly turn into
exploitable security bugs in shipping software otherwise.
- WBR, Alexey Proskuryakov
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
