Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Disable NPLB test cases which are not applicable for Android #4721

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 25.lts.1+
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jonastsai
Copy link
Contributor

b/338229737
b/368228941
b/379602017
b/380030274
b/380031306
b/380032222
b/380344836
b/380347735

Copy link
Contributor

@yell0wd0g yell0wd0g left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These changes LGTM (modulo my small comments), would like to solicit @y4vor 's opinion (and @andrewsavage1 FYI).

@@ -34,6 +35,11 @@ TEST(SbDirectoryCanOpenTest, SunnyDay) {
}

TEST(SbDirectoryCanOpenTest, SunnyDayStaticContent) {
// TODO, b/380344836, the test cases are not applicable on Android
if (GetRuntimePlatform() == PlatformType::kPlatformTypeAndroid) {
GTEST_SKIP() << "Not applicable on Android";
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With this and subsequent SKIPs, could we remove some suppressions from test_filters.py ?

starboard/nplb/testcase_helpers.h Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
starboard/nplb/testcase_helpers.h Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -34,6 +35,11 @@ TEST(SbDirectoryCanOpenTest, SunnyDay) {
}

TEST(SbDirectoryCanOpenTest, SunnyDayStaticContent) {
// TODO, b/380344836, the test cases are not applicable on Android
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

QQ: Shouldn't this be // TODO(b/380344836): ? (Same throughout).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How about remove TODO and leave the ticket number only as there is not follow up work for this on Android

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it is updated to // TODO(b/380344836): Skip test case(s) not applicable to Android.

@@ -34,6 +35,11 @@ TEST(SbDirectoryCanOpenTest, SunnyDay) {
}

TEST(SbDirectoryCanOpenTest, SunnyDayStaticContent) {
// TODO, b/380344836, the test cases are not applicable on Android
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's not clear to me what the follow up work here actually is

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I keep the TODO as a reminder that this can be refined

@@ -34,6 +35,11 @@ TEST(SbDirectoryCanOpenTest, SunnyDay) {
}

TEST(SbDirectoryCanOpenTest, SunnyDayStaticContent) {
// TODO, b/380344836, the test cases are not applicable on Android
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How did you determine which tests should be disabled? Android on c25 is expected to use the entire Starboard layer, so I don't see how we're able to disable any of these

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The disabled test cases are identified because they are failed on Android. For each failed test case, a ticket is created to review them. Only the reviewed test cases are removed from Android platform. Most of the test cases are removed because they are not available no Android platform.

@hlwarriner hlwarriner self-requested a review January 22, 2025 16:18
@y4vor y4vor self-requested a review January 23, 2025 15:18
b/338229737
b/368228941
b/379602017
b/380030274
b/380031306
b/380032222
b/380344836
b/380347735
@jonastsai jonastsai marked this pull request as ready for review February 3, 2025 02:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants