Migrate svg layout tests to use slimming paint by default

Migrate svg layout tests to use slimming paint by default

Existing slimming paint expectations have been copied to preserve history.

Gardeners, please do not revert for only a few failures. Rather, add TestExpectations and assign to schenney@.

R=wangxianzhu,pdr,chrishtr,dpranke
BUG=382491, 497950
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=197403

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-17 20:08:00]

The CQ bit was checked by schenney@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-17 20:08:25]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1193533006/1

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-17 20:08:34]

Expecting Mac and Win failures because specific expectations for those have not
been migrated yet. Linux failures are unexpected.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-17 20:17:55]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-17 20:17:57]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  android_blink_compile_rel on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/android_blink_compile_re...)
  blink_presubmit on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/blink_presubmit/builds/3...)
  linux_chromium_gn_rel on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/linux_chromium_gn_rel/bu...)
  mac_blink_compile_dbg on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/mac_blink_compile_dbg/bu...)
  mac_blink_rel on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/mac_blink_rel/builds/59321)

[pdr., 2015-06-17 20:18:18]

On 2015/06/17 at 20:08:34, schenney wrote:
> Expecting Mac and Win failures because specific expectations for those have
not been migrated yet. Linux failures are unexpected.

I can review this but I need some advice... how would you like me to review
this?

Should I wait for the mac/win results?

[Xianzhu, 2015-06-17 20:24:45]

I feel it's more convenient to look at try bot test results than looking at CL
diffs, because it's easier to tell how an expected.png changed in layout test
results. However, for this CL I believe you have checked all of them and I just
trust you :)

lgtm as long as all expectations are migrated.

(fwiw, I feel it more efficient to run try bots first with slimming paint
enabled, check results, mark NeedsRebaseline, and discard all old slimming paint
expectations, than moving and checking each of the slimming paint expectations.
I wonder if it's really useful and feasible to keep the history of the slimming
paint expectation files.)

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-17 20:24:55]

I've looked over all these diffs and they are all good. I suggest everyone wait
for the Mac and Win results and to see if anything turns up that we had no
expectations for.

I need to rebase after the fast/forms patch.

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-17 20:29:02]

The CQ bit was checked by schenney@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-17 20:29:04]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
wangxianzhu@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1193533006/#ps20001
(title: "Rebase")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-17 20:29:37]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1193533006/20001

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-17 20:30:32]

I was planning to have a separate patch to remove any Slimming Paint
expectations that seem to have no use any more. Apart from history, one of the
reasons I did it this way was to see where our expectations were unnecessary,
because I think they deserve greater scrutiny.

[Xianzhu, 2015-06-17 21:01:21]

On 2015/06/17 20:30:32, Stephen Chenney wrote:
> I was planning to have a separate patch to remove any Slimming Paint
> expectations that seem to have no use any more.

I also left virtual/slimmingpaint/fast expectations. CLs to remove them are too
big to upload.

> Apart from history, one of the
> reasons I did it this way was to see where our expectations were unnecessary,
> because I think they deserve greater scrutiny.

I think my method automatically discards any unnecessary expectations because it
just ignores all slimming paint expectations.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-17 21:57:56]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-17 21:57:58]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_blink_rel on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/linux_blink_rel/builds/6...)

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-18 17:50:42]

Now it's ready to review. There's a decent chance it will pass the CQ, and even
some change I got all the sub-platform expectations (e.g. win-xp).

Honestly, I think the only thing to look at is the CQ results.

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-18 17:51:04]

The CQ bit was checked by schenney@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-18 17:51:07]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
wangxianzhu@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1193533006/#ps40001
(title: "Now with Mac and Win expectations")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-18 17:52:05]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1193533006/40001

[pdr., 2015-06-18 17:58:30]

On 2015/06/18 at 17:50:42, schenney wrote:
> Now it's ready to review. There's a decent chance it will pass the CQ, and
even some change I got all the sub-platform expectations (e.g. win-xp).
> 
> Honestly, I think the only thing to look at is the CQ results.

Cool, I'll look at this as soon as the CQ dry run completes.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-18 19:31:32]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-18 19:31:35]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_blink_rel on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/linux_blink_rel/builds/6...)

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-18 20:06:15]

All set now. Some rebaselines are needed as the migrated results are not
correct. I'm not reverting the migration of those because it's hard to tease out
platform variations. I'd rather just land it and sort out the few failures
afterwards. I've verified the new results are correct.

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-18 20:11:23]

The CQ bit was checked by schenney@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-18 20:11:26]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
wangxianzhu@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1193533006/#ps60001
(title: "Ready to go")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-18 20:12:24]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1193533006/60001

[pdr., 2015-06-18 20:15:58]

pdr@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ wangxianzhu@chromium.org

[pdr., 2015-06-18 20:16:03]

LGTM

https://codereview.chromium.org/1193533006/diff/60001/LayoutTests/TestExpecta...
File LayoutTests/TestExpectations (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1193533006/diff/60001/LayoutTests/TestExpecta...
LayoutTests/TestExpectations:1712: # crbug.com/463358 [ Debug ]
svg/transforms/animated-path-inside-transformed-html.xhtml [ ImageOnlyFailure
Pass ]
After this lands, can you double-check this one? I think it may just need a
rebaseline.

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-18 20:40:46]

The CQ bit was unchecked by schenney@chromium.org

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-18 20:41:03]

The CQ bit was checked by schenney@chromium.org

[Stephen Chennney, 2015-06-18 20:42:20]

On 2015/06/18 20:16:03, pdr wrote:
> LGTM
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1193533006/diff/60001/LayoutTests/TestExpecta...
> File LayoutTests/TestExpectations (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1193533006/diff/60001/LayoutTests/TestExpecta...
> LayoutTests/TestExpectations:1712: # crbug.com/463358 [ Debug ]
> svg/transforms/animated-path-inside-transformed-html.xhtml [ ImageOnlyFailure
> Pass ]
> After this lands, can you double-check this one? I think it may just need a
> rebaseline.

Looking at flakiness, the test is very slightly flakey, so maybe not worth
having marked as flakey.
http://test-results.appspot.com/dashboards/flakiness_dashboard.html#tests=svg...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-18 20:42:26]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1193533006/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-18 22:33:42]

Committed patchset #4 (id:60001) as
https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=197403