| Index: docs/testing/writing_layout_tests.md
|
| diff --git a/docs/testing/writing_layout_tests.md b/docs/testing/writing_layout_tests.md
|
| new file mode 100644
|
| index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6656762d1b294d89bf5643675bc1df43ccdf9a87
|
| --- /dev/null
|
| +++ b/docs/testing/writing_layout_tests.md
|
| @@ -0,0 +1,787 @@
|
| +# Writing Layout Tests
|
| +
|
| +_Layout tests_ is a bit of a misnomer. This term is
|
| +[a part of our WebKit heritage](https://webkit.org/blog/1452/layout-tests-theory/),
|
| +and we use it to refer to every test that is written as a Web page (HTML, SVG,
|
| +or XHTML) and lives in
|
| +[third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/](../../third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests).
|
| +
|
| +[TOC]
|
| +
|
| +## Overview
|
| +
|
| +Layout tests should be used to accomplish one of the following goals:
|
| +
|
| +1. The entire surface of Blink that is exposed to the Web should be covered by
|
| + tests that we contribute to the
|
| + [Web Platform Tests Project](https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests)
|
| + (WPT). This helps us avoid regressions, and helps us identify Web Platform
|
| + areas where the major browsers don't have interoperable implementations.
|
| + Furthermore, by contributing to projects such as WPT, we share the burden of
|
| + writing tests with the other browser vendors, and we help all the browsers
|
| + get better. This is very much in line with our goal to move the Web forward.
|
| +2. When a Blink feature cannot be tested using the tools provided by WPT, and
|
| + cannot be easily covered by
|
| + [C++ unit tests](https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/third_party/WebKit/Source/web/tests/?q=webframetest&sq=package:chromium&type=cs),
|
| + the feature must be covered by layout tests, to avoid unexpected regressions.
|
| + These tests will use Blink-specific testing APIs that are only available in
|
| + [content_shell](./layout_tests_in_content_shell.md).
|
| +
|
| +*** promo
|
| +If you know that Blink layout tests are upstreamed to other projects, such as
|
| +[test262](https://github.com/tc39/test262), please update this document. Most
|
| +importantly, our guidelines should to make it easy for our tests to be
|
| +upstreamed. The `blink-dev` mailing list will be happy to help you harmonize our
|
| +current guidelines with communal test repositories.
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +### Test Types
|
| +
|
| +There are four broad types of layout tests, listed in the order of preference.
|
| +
|
| +* *JavaScript Tests* are the layout test implementation of
|
| + [xUnit tests](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XUnit). These tests contain
|
| + assertions written in JavaScript, and pass if the assertions evaluate to
|
| + true.
|
| +* *Reference Tests* render a test page and a reference page, and pass if the two
|
| + renderings are identical, according to a pixel-by-pixel comparison. These
|
| + tests are less robust, harder to debug, and significantly slower than
|
| + JavaScript tests, and are only used when JavaScript tests are insufficient,
|
| + such as when testing paint code.
|
| +* *Pixel Tests* render a test page and compare the result against a pre-rendered
|
| + baseline image in the repository. Pixel tests are less robust than all
|
| + alternatives listed above, because the rendering of a page is influenced by
|
| + many factors such as the host computer's graphics card and driver, the
|
| + platform's text rendering system, and various user-configurable operating
|
| + system settings. For this reason, it is common for a pixel test to have a
|
| + different reference image for each platform that Blink is tested on. Pixel
|
| + tests are least preferred, because the reference images are
|
| + [quite cumbersome to manage](./layout_test_expectations.md).
|
| +* *Dump Render Tree (DRT) Tests* output a textual representation of the render
|
| + tree, which is the key data structure in Blink's page rendering system. The
|
| + test passes if the output matches a baseline text file in the repository. In
|
| + addition to their text result, DRT tests can also produce an image result
|
| + which is compared to an image baseline, similarly to pixel tests (described
|
| + above). A DRT test with two results (text and image) passes if _both_ results
|
| + match the baselines in the repository. DRT tests are less desirable than all
|
| + the alternatives, because they depend on a browser implementation detail.
|
| +
|
| +## General Principles
|
| +
|
| +The principles below are adapted from
|
| +[Test the Web Forward's Test Format Guidelines](http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-format-guidelines.html)
|
| +and
|
| +[WebKit's Wiki page on Writing good test cases](https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/Writing%20Layout%20Tests%20for%20DumpRenderTree).
|
| +
|
| +* Tests should be **concise**, without compromising on the principles below.
|
| + Every element and piece of code on the page should be necessary and relevant
|
| + to what is being tested. For example, don't build a fully functional signup
|
| + form if you only need a text field or a button.
|
| + * Content needed to satisfy the principles below is considered necessary.
|
| + For example, it is acceptable and desirable to add elements that make
|
| + the test self-describing (see below), and to add code that makes the
|
| + test more reliable (see below).
|
| + * Content that makes test failures easier to debug is considered necessary
|
| + (to maintaining a good development speed), and is both acceptable and
|
| + desirable.
|
| + * Conciseness is particularly important for reference tests and pixel
|
| + tests, as the test pages are rendered in an 800x600px viewport. Having
|
| + content outside the viewport is undesirable because the outside content
|
| + does not get compared, and because the resulting scrollbars are
|
| + platform-specific UI widgets, making the test results less reliable.
|
| +
|
| +* Tests should be as **fast** as possible, without compromising on the
|
| + principles below. Blink has several thousand layout tests that are run in
|
| + parallel, and avoiding unnecessary delays is crucial to keeping our Commit
|
| + Queue in good shape.
|
| + * Avoid [window.setTimeout](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/WindowTimers/setTimeout),
|
| + as it wastes time on the testing infrastructure. Instead, use specific
|
| + event handlers, such as
|
| + [window.onload](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/GlobalEventHandlers/onload),
|
| + to decide when to advance to the next step in a test.
|
| +
|
| +* Tests should be **reliable** and yield consistent results for a given
|
| + implementation. Flaky tests slow down your fellow developers' debugging
|
| + efforts and the Commit Queue.
|
| + * `window.setTimeout` is again a primary offender here. Asides from wasting
|
| + time on a fast system, tests that rely on fixed timeouts can fail when run
|
| + on systems that are slower than expected.
|
| + * Follow the guidelines in this
|
| + [PSA on writing reliable layout tests](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Yl4SnTLBWmY1O99_BTtQvuoffP8YM9HZx2YPkEsaduQ/edit).
|
| +
|
| +* Tests should be **self-describing**, so that a project member can recognize
|
| + whether a test passes or fails without having to read the specification of the
|
| + feature being tested. `testharness.js` makes a test self-describing when used
|
| + correctly, but tests that degrade to manual tests
|
| + [must be carefully designed](http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-style-guidelines.html)
|
| + to be self-describing.
|
| +
|
| +* Tests should require a **minimal** amount of cognitive effort to read and
|
| + maintain.
|
| + * Avoid depending on edge case behavior of features that aren't explicitly
|
| + covered by the test. For example, except where testing parsing, tests
|
| + should contain valid markup (no parsing errors).
|
| + * Tests should provide as much relevant information as possible when
|
| + failing. `testharness.js` tests should prefer
|
| + [rich assert_ functions](https://github.com/w3c/testharness.js/blob/master/docs/api.md#list-of-assertions)
|
| + to combining `assert_true()` with a boolean operator. Using appropriate
|
| + `assert_` functions results in better diagnostic output when the assertion
|
| + fails.
|
| + * Prefer JavaScript's
|
| + [===](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Comparison_Operators#Identity_strict_equality_())
|
| + operator to
|
| + [==](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Comparison_Operators#Equality_())
|
| + so that readers don't have to reason about
|
| + [type conversion](http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/#sec-abstract-equality-comparison).
|
| +
|
| +* Tests should be as **cross-platform** as reasonably possible. Avoid
|
| + assumptions about device type, screen resolution, etc. Unavoidable assumptions
|
| + should be documented.
|
| + * When possible, tests should only use Web platform features, as specified
|
| + in the relevant standards. When the Web platform's APIs are insufficient,
|
| + tests should prefer to use WPT extended testing APIs, such as
|
| + `wpt_automation`.
|
| + * Test pages should use the HTML5 doctype (`<!doctype html>`) unless they
|
| + specifically cover
|
| + [quirks mode](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Quirks_Mode_and_Standards_Mode)
|
| + behavior.
|
| + * Tests should be written under the assumption that they will be upstreamed
|
| + to the WPT project. For example, tests should follow the
|
| + [WPT guidelines](http://testthewebforward.org/docs/writing-tests.html).
|
| + * Tests that use Blink-specific testing APIs should feature-test for the
|
| + presence of the testing APIs and degrade to
|
| + [manual tests](http://testthewebforward.org/docs/manual-test.html) when
|
| + the testing APIs are not present. _This is not currently enforced in code
|
| + review. However, please keep in mind that a manual test can be debugged in
|
| + the browser, whereas a test that does not degrade gracefully can only be
|
| + debugged in the test runner._
|
| +
|
| +* Tests must be **self-contained** and not depend on external network resources.
|
| + Unless used by multiple test files, CSS and JavaScript should be inlined using
|
| + `<style>` and `<script>` tags. Content shared by multiple tests should be
|
| + placed in a `resources/` directory near the tests that share it. See below for
|
| + using multiple origins in a test.
|
| +
|
| +* Test **file names** should describe what is being tested. File names should
|
| + use `snake-case`, but preserve the case of any embedded API names. For
|
| + example, prefer `document-createElement.html` to
|
| + `document-create-element.html`.
|
| +
|
| +* Tests should prefer **modern features** in JavaScript and in the Web Platform.
|
| + * Tests should use
|
| + [strict mode](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Strict_mode)
|
| + for all JavaScript, except when specifically testing sloppy mode behavior.
|
| + Strict mode flags deprecated features and helps catch some errors, such as
|
| + forgetting to declare variables.
|
| + * JavaScript code should prefer
|
| + [const](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Statements/const)
|
| + and
|
| + [let](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Statements/let)
|
| + over `var`,
|
| + [classes](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Classes)
|
| + over other OOP constructs, and
|
| + [Promises](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise)
|
| + over other mechanisms for structuring asynchronous code.
|
| + * The desire to use modern features must be balanced with the desire for
|
| + cross-platform tests. Avoid using features that haven't been shipped by
|
| + other developed major rendering engines (WebKit, Gecko, Edge). When
|
| + unsure, check [caniuse.com](http://caniuse.com/).
|
| +
|
| +* Tests should use the UTF-8 **character encoding**, which should be declared by
|
| + `<meta charset=utf-8>`. This does not apply when specifically testing
|
| + encodings.
|
| + * At this time, code reviewers may choose to accept layout tests that do
|
| + not have a `<meta charset>`, as long as the file content is pure ASCII.
|
| + If going that route, please keep in mind that Firefox currently issues a
|
| + dev tools warning for pages without a declared charset.
|
| +
|
| +* Tests should aim to have a **coding style** that is consistent with
|
| + [Google's JavaScript Style Guide](https://google.github.io/styleguide/jsguide.html),
|
| + and
|
| + [Google's HTML/CSS Style Guide](https://google.github.io/styleguide/htmlcssguide.xml),
|
| + with the following exceptions.
|
| + * Rules related to Google Closure and JSDoc do not apply.
|
| + * Modern Web Platform and JavaScript features should be preferred to legacy
|
| + constructs that target old browsers. For example, prefer `const` and `let`
|
| + to `var`, and prefer `class` over other OOP constructs. This should be
|
| + balanced with the desire to have cross-platform tests.
|
| + * Concerns regarding buggy behavior in legacy browsers do not apply. For
|
| + example, the garbage collection cycle note in the _Closures_ section does
|
| + not apply.
|
| + * Per the JavaScript guide, new tests should also follow any per-project
|
| + style guide, such as the
|
| + [ServiceWorker Tests Style guide](http://www.chromium.org/blink/serviceworker/testing).
|
| +
|
| +*** note
|
| +This document intentionally uses _should_ a lot more than _must_, as defined in
|
| +[RFC 2119](https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt). Writing layout tests is a
|
| +careful act of balancing many concerns, and this humble document cannot possibly
|
| +capture the context that rests in the head of an experienced Blink engineer.
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +## JavaScript Tests
|
| +
|
| +Whenever possible, the testing criteria should be expressed in JavaScript. The
|
| +alternatives, which will be described in future sections, result in slower and
|
| +less reliable tests.
|
| +
|
| +All new JavaScript tests should be written using the
|
| +[testharness.js](https://github.com/w3c/testharness.js/) testing framework. This
|
| +framework is used by the tests in the
|
| +[web-platform-tests](https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests) repository,
|
| +which is shared with all the other browser vendors, so `testharness.js` tests
|
| +are more accessible to browser developers.
|
| +
|
| +As a shared framework, `testharness.js` enjoys high-quality documentation, such
|
| +as [a tutorial](http://testthewebforward.org/docs/testharness-tutorial.html) and
|
| +[API documentation](https://github.com/w3c/testharness.js/blob/master/docs/api.md).
|
| +Layout tests should follow the recommendations of the above documents.
|
| +Furthermore, layout tests should include relevant
|
| +[metadata](http://testthewebforward.org/docs/css-metadata.html). The
|
| +specification URL (in `<link rel="help">`) is almost always relevant, and is
|
| +incredibly helpful to a developer who needs to understand the test quickly.
|
| +
|
| +Below is a skeleton for a JavaScript test embedded in an HTML page. Note that,
|
| +in order to follow the minimality guideline, the test omits the tags `<html>`,
|
| +`<head>`, and `<body>`, as they can be inferred by the HTML parser.
|
| +
|
| +```html
|
| +<!doctype html>
|
| +<meta charset="utf-8">
|
| +<title>JavaScript: the true literal</title>
|
| +<link rel="help" href="https://tc39.github.io/ecma262/#sec-boolean-literals">
|
| +<meta name="assert" value="The true literal is equal to itself and immutable">
|
| +<script src="/resources/testharness.js"></script>
|
| +<script src="/resources/testharnessreport.js"></script>
|
| +<script>
|
| +'use strict';
|
| +
|
| +// Synchronous test example.
|
| +test(() => {
|
| + const value = true;
|
| + assert_true(value, 'true literal');
|
| + assert_equals(value.toString(), 'true', 'the string representation of true');
|
| +}, 'The literal true in a synchronous test case');
|
| +
|
| +// Asynchronous test example.
|
| +async_test(t => {
|
| + const originallyTrue = true;
|
| + setTimeout(t.step_func_done(() => {
|
| + assert_equals(originallyTrue, true);
|
| + }), 0);
|
| +}, 'The literal true in a setTimeout callback');
|
| +
|
| +// Promise test example.
|
| +promise_test(() => {
|
| + return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
|
| + resolve(true);
|
| + }).then(value => {
|
| + assert_true(value);
|
| + });
|
| +}, 'The literal true used to resolve a Promise');
|
| +
|
| +</script>
|
| +```
|
| +
|
| +Some points that are not immediately obvious from the example:
|
| +
|
| +* The `<meta name="assert">` describes the purpose of the entire file, and
|
| + is not redundant to `<title>`. Don't add a `<meta name="assert">` when the
|
| + information in the `<title>` is sufficient.
|
| +* When calling an `assert_` function that compares two values, the first
|
| + argument is the actual value (produced by the functionality being tested), and
|
| + the second argument is the expected value (known good, golden). The order
|
| + is important, because the testing harness relies on it to generate expressive
|
| + error messages that are relied upon when debugging test failures.
|
| +* The assertion description (the string argument to `assert_` methods) conveys
|
| + the way the actual value was obtained.
|
| + * If the expected value doesn't make it clear, the assertion description
|
| + should explain the desired behavior.
|
| + * Test cases with a single assertion should omit the assertion's description
|
| + when it is sufficiently clear.
|
| +* Each test case describes the circumstance that it tests, without being
|
| + redundant.
|
| + * Do not start test case descriptions with redundant terms like "Testing"
|
| + or "Test for".
|
| + * Test files with a single test case should omit the test case description.
|
| + The file's `<title>` should be sufficient to describe the scenario being
|
| + tested.
|
| +* Asynchronous tests have a few subtleties.
|
| + * The `async_test` wrapper calls its function with a test case argument that
|
| + is used to signal when the test case is done, and to connect assertion
|
| + failures to the correct test.
|
| + * `t.done()` must be called after all the test case's assertions have
|
| + executed.
|
| + * Test case assertions (actually, any callback code that can throw
|
| + exceptions) must be wrapped in `t.step_func()` calls, so that
|
| + assertion failures and exceptions can be traced back to the correct test
|
| + case.
|
| + * `t.step_func_done()` is a shortcut that combines `t.step_func()` with a
|
| + `t.done()` call.
|
| +
|
| +*** promo
|
| +Layout tests that load from `file://` origins must currently use relative paths
|
| +to point to
|
| +[/resources/testharness.js](../../third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/resources/testharness.js)
|
| +and
|
| +[/resources/testharnessreport.js](../../third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/resources/testharnessreport.js).
|
| +This is contrary to the WPT guidelines, which call for absolute paths.
|
| +This limitation does not apply to the tests in `LayoutTests/http`, which rely on
|
| +an HTTP server, or to the tests in `LayoutTests/imported/wpt`, which are
|
| +imported from the [WPT repository](https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests).
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +### WPT Supplemental Testing APIs
|
| +
|
| +Some tests simply cannot be expressed using the Web Platform APIs. For example,
|
| +some tests that require a user to perform a gesture, such as a mouse click,
|
| +cannot be implemented using Web APIs. The WPT project covers some of these cases
|
| +via supplemental testing APIs.
|
| +
|
| +*** promo
|
| +In many cases, the user gesture is not actually necessary. For example, many
|
| +event handling tests can use
|
| +[synthetic events](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/Guide/Events/Creating_and_triggering_events).
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +*** note
|
| +TODO: document wpt_automation. Manual tests might end up moving here.
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +### Relying on Blink-Specific Testing APIs
|
| +
|
| +Tests that cannot be expressed using the Web Platform APIs or WPT's testing APIs
|
| +use Blink-specific testing APIs. These APIs are only available in
|
| +[content_shell](./layout_tests_in_content_shell.md), and should only be used as
|
| +a last resort.
|
| +
|
| +A downside of Blink-specific APIs is that they are not as well documented as the
|
| +Web Platform features. Learning to use a Blink-specific feature requires finding
|
| +other tests that use it, or reading its source code.
|
| +
|
| +For example, the most popular Blink-specific API is `testRunner`, which is
|
| +implemented in
|
| +[components/test_runner/test_runner.h](../../components/test_runner/test_runner.h)
|
| +and
|
| +[components/test_runner/test_runner.cpp](../../components/test_runner/test_runner.cpp).
|
| +By skimming the `TestRunnerBindings::Install` method, we learn that the
|
| +testRunner API is presented by the `window.testRunner` and
|
| +`window.layoutTestsController` objects, which are synonyms. Reading the
|
| +`TestRunnerBindings::GetObjectTemplateBuilder` method tells us what properties
|
| +are available on the `window.testRunner` object.
|
| +
|
| +*** aside
|
| +`window.testRunner` is the preferred way to access the `testRunner` APIs.
|
| +`window.layoutTestsController` is still supported because it is used by
|
| +3rd-party tests.
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +*** note
|
| +`testRunner` is the most popular testing API because it is also used indirectly
|
| +by tests that stick to Web Platform APIs. The `testharnessreport.js` file in
|
| +`testharness.js` is specifically designated to hold glue code that connects
|
| +`testharness.js` to the testing environment. Our implementation is in
|
| +[third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/resources/testharnessreport.js](../../third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/resources/testharnessreport.js),
|
| +and uses the `testRunner` API.
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +See the [components/test_runner/](../../components/test_runner/) directory and
|
| +[WebKit's LayoutTests guide](https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/Writing%20Layout%20Tests%20for%20DumpRenderTree)
|
| +for other useful APIs. For example, `window.eventSender`
|
| +([components/test_runner/event_sender.h](../../components/test_runner/event_sender.h)
|
| +and
|
| +[components/test_runner/event_sender.cpp](../../components/test_runner/event_sender.cpp))
|
| +has methods that simulate events input such as keyboard / mouse input and
|
| +drag-and-drop.
|
| +
|
| +Here is a UML diagram of how the `testRunner` bindings fit into Chromium.
|
| +
|
| +[](https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1KNRNjlxK0Q3Tp8rKxuuM5mpWf4OJQZmvm9_kpwu_Wwg/edit)
|
| +### Manual Tests
|
| +
|
| +Whenever possible, tests that rely on (WPT's or Blink's) testing APIs should
|
| +also be usable as
|
| +[manual tests](http://testthewebforward.org/docs/manual-test.html). This makes
|
| +it easy to debug the test, and to check whether our behavior matches other
|
| +browsers.
|
| +
|
| +*** note
|
| +The recommendation to have tests that depend on Blink-only testing APIs
|
| +gracefully degrade to manual tests is not currently enforced in code review.
|
| +When considering skipping this recommendation, please keep in mind that a manual
|
| +test can be debugged in the browser, whereas a test that does not degrade
|
| +gracefully can only be debugged in the test runner. Fellow project members and
|
| +future you will thank you for having your test work as a manual test.
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +Manual tests should minimize the chance of user error. This implies keeping the
|
| +manual steps to a minimum, and having simple and clear instructions that
|
| +describe all the configuration changes and user gestures that match the effect
|
| +of the Blink-specific APIs used by the test.
|
| +
|
| +Below is an example of a fairly minimal test that uses a Blink-Specific API
|
| +(`window.eventSender`), and gracefully degrades to a manual test.
|
| +
|
| +```html
|
| +<!doctype html>
|
| +<meta charset="utf-8">
|
| +<title>DOM: Event.isTrusted for UI events</title>
|
| +<link rel="help" href="https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-event-istrusted">
|
| +<link rel="help" href="https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#constructing-events">
|
| +<meta name="assert"
|
| + content="Event.isTrusted is true for events generated by user interaction">
|
| +<script src="../../resources/testharness.js"></script>
|
| +<script src="../../resources/testharnessreport.js"></script>
|
| +
|
| +<p>Please click on the button below.</p>
|
| +<button>Click Me!</button>
|
| +
|
| +<script>
|
| +'use strict';
|
| +
|
| +setup({ explicit_timeout: true });
|
| +
|
| +promise_test(() => {
|
| + const button = document.querySelector('button');
|
| + return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
|
| + const button = document.querySelector('button');
|
| + button.addEventListener('click', (event) => {
|
| + resolve(event);
|
| + });
|
| +
|
| + if (window.eventSender) {
|
| + eventSender.mouseMoveTo(button.offsetLeft, button.offsetTop);
|
| + eventSender.mouseDown();
|
| + eventSender.mouseUp();
|
| + }
|
| + }).then((clickEvent) => {
|
| + assert_true(clickEvent.isTrusted);
|
| + });
|
| +
|
| +}, 'Click generated by user interaction');
|
| +
|
| +</script>
|
| +```
|
| +
|
| +The test exhibits the following desirable features:
|
| +
|
| +* It has a second specification URL (`<link rel="help">`), because the paragraph
|
| + that documents the tested feature (referenced by the primary URL) is not very
|
| + informative on its own.
|
| +* It links to the
|
| + [WHATWG Living Standard](https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#What_does_.22Living_Standard.22_mean.3F),
|
| + rather than to a frozen version of the specification.
|
| +* It contains clear instructions for manually triggering the test conditions.
|
| + The test starts with a paragraph (`<p>`) that tells the tester exactly what to
|
| + do, and the `<button>` that needs to be clicked is clearly labeled.
|
| +* It disables the timeout mechanism built into `testharness.js` by calling
|
| + `setup({ explicit_timeout: true });`
|
| +* It checks for the presence of the Blink-specific testing APIs
|
| + (`window.eventSender`) before invoking them. The test does not automatically
|
| + fail when the APIs are not present.
|
| +* It uses [Promises](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise)
|
| + to separate the test setup from the assertions. This is particularly helpful
|
| + for manual tests that depend on a sequence of events to occur, as Promises
|
| + offer a composable way to express waiting for asynchronous events that avoids
|
| + [callback hell](http://stackabuse.com/avoiding-callback-hell-in-node-js/).
|
| +
|
| +Notice that the test is pretty heavy compared to a minimal JavaScript test that
|
| +does not rely on testing APIs. Only use testing APIs when the desired testing
|
| +conditions cannot be set up using Web Platform APIs.
|
| +
|
| +### Text Test Baselines
|
| +
|
| +By default, all the test cases in a file that uses `testharness.js` are expected
|
| +to pass. However, in some cases, we prefer to add failing test cases to the
|
| +repository, so that we can be notified when the failure modes change (e.g., we
|
| +want to know if a test starts crashing rather than returning incorrect output).
|
| +In these situations, a test file will be accompanied by a baseline, which is an
|
| +`-expected.txt` file that contains the test's expected output.
|
| +
|
| +The baselines are generated automatically when appropriate by
|
| +`run-webkit-tests`, which is described [here](./layout_tests.md), and by the
|
| +[rebaselining tools](./layout_test_expectations.md).
|
| +
|
| +Text baselines for `testharness.js` should be avoided, as having a text baseline
|
| +associated with a `testharness.js` indicates the presence of a bug. For this
|
| +reason, CLs that add text baselines must include a
|
| +[crbug.com](https://crbug.com) link for an issue tracking the removal of the
|
| +text expectations.
|
| +
|
| +* When creating tests that will be upstreamed to WPT, and Blink's current
|
| + behavior does not match the specification that is being tested, a text
|
| + baseline is necessary. Remember to create an issue tracking the expectation's
|
| + removal, and to link the issue in the CL description.
|
| +* Layout tests that cannot be upstreamed to WPT should use JavaScript to
|
| + document Blink's current behavior, rather than using JavaScript to document
|
| + desired behavior and a text file to document current behavior.
|
| +
|
| +### The js-test.js Legacy Harness
|
| +
|
| +*** promo
|
| +For historical reasons, older tests are written using the `js-test` harness.
|
| +This harness is **deprecated**, and should not be used for new tests.
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +If you need to understand old tests, the best `js-test` documentation is its
|
| +implementation at
|
| +[third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/resources/js-test.js](../../third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/resources/js-test.js).
|
| +
|
| +`js-test` tests lean heavily on the Blink-specific `testRunner` testing API.
|
| +In a nutshell, the tests call `testRunner.dumpAsText()` to signal that the page
|
| +content should be dumped and compared against a text baseline (an
|
| +`-expected.txt` file). As a consequence, `js-test` tests are always accompanied
|
| +by text baselines. Asynchronous tests also use `testRunner.waitUntilDone()` and
|
| +`testRunner.notifyDone()` to tell the testing tools when they are complete.
|
| +
|
| +### Tests that use an HTTP Server
|
| +
|
| +By default, tests are loaded as if via `file:` URLs. Some web platform features
|
| +require tests served via HTTP or HTTPS, for example absolute paths (`src=/foo`)
|
| +or features restricted to secure protocols.
|
| +
|
| +HTTP tests are those under `LayoutTests/http/tests` (or virtual variants). Use a
|
| +locally running HTTP server (Apache) to run them. Tests are served off of ports
|
| +8000 and 8080 for HTTP, and 8443 for HTTPS. If you run the tests using
|
| +`run-webkit-tests`, the server will be started automatically. To run the server
|
| +manually to reproduce or debug a failure:
|
| +
|
| +```bash
|
| +cd src/third_party/WebKit/Tools/Scripts
|
| +run-blink-httpd start
|
| +```
|
| +
|
| +The layout tests will be served from `http://127.0.0.1:8000`. For example, to
|
| +run the test `http/tests/serviceworker/chromium/service-worker-allowed.html`,
|
| +navigate to
|
| +`http://127.0.0.1:8000/serviceworker/chromium/service-worker-allowed.html`. Some
|
| +tests will behave differently if you go to 127.0.0.1 instead of localhost, so
|
| +use 127.0.0.1.
|
| +
|
| +To kill the server, run `run-blink-httpd --server stop`, or just use `taskkill`
|
| +or the Task Manager on Windows, and `killall` or Activity Monitor on MacOS.
|
| +
|
| +The test server sets up an alias to the `LayoutTests/resources` directory. In
|
| +HTTP tests, you can access the testing framework at e.g.
|
| +`src="/js-test-resources/testharness.js"`.
|
| +
|
| +TODO: Document [wptserve](http://wptserve.readthedocs.io/) when we are in a
|
| +position to use it to run layout tests.
|
| +
|
| +## Reference Tests (Reftests)
|
| +
|
| +Reference tests, also known as reftests, perform a pixel-by-pixel comparison
|
| +between the rendered image of a test page and the rendered image of a reference
|
| +page. Most reference tests pass if the two images match, but there are cases
|
| +where it is useful to have a test pass when the two images do _not_ match.
|
| +
|
| +Reference tests are more difficult to debug than JavaScript tests, and tend to
|
| +be slower as well. Therefore, they should only be used for functionality that
|
| +cannot be covered by JavaScript tests.
|
| +
|
| +New reference tests should follow the
|
| +[WPT reftests guidelines](http://testthewebforward.org/docs/reftests.html). The
|
| +most important points are summarized below.
|
| +
|
| +* The test page declares the reference page using a `<link rel="match">` or
|
| + `<link rel="mismatch">`, depending on whether the test passes when the test
|
| + image matches or does not match the reference image.
|
| +* The reference page must not use the feature being tested. Otherwise, the test
|
| + is meaningless.
|
| +* The reference page should be as simple as possible, and should not depend on
|
| + advanced features. Ideally, the reference page should render as intended even
|
| + on browsers with poor CSS support.
|
| +* Reference tests should be self-describing.
|
| +* Reference tests do _not_ include `testharness.js`.
|
| +
|
| +Our testing infrastructure was designed for the
|
| +[WebKit reftests](https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/Writing%20Reftests) that Blink
|
| +has inherited. The consequences are summarized below.
|
| +
|
| +* Each reference page must be in the same directory as its associated test.
|
| + Given a test page named `foo` (e.g. `foo.html` or `foo.svg`),
|
| + * The reference page must be named `foo-expected` (e.g.,
|
| + `foo-expected.html`) if the test passes when the two images match.
|
| + * The reference page must be named `foo-expected-mismatch` (e.g.,
|
| + `foo-expected-mismatch.svg`) if the test passes when the two images do
|
| + _not_ match.
|
| +* Multiple references and chained references are not supported.
|
| +
|
| +The following example demonstrates a reference test for
|
| +[`<ol>`'s reversed attribute](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/ol).
|
| +The example assumes that the test page is named `ol-reversed.html`.
|
| +
|
| +```html
|
| +<!doctype html>
|
| +<meta charset="utf-8">
|
| +<link rel="match" href="ol-reversed-expected.html">
|
| +
|
| +<ol reversed>
|
| + <li>A</li>
|
| + <li>B</li>
|
| + <li>C</li>
|
| +</ol>
|
| +```
|
| +
|
| +The reference page, which must be named `ol-reversed-expected.html`, is below.
|
| +
|
| +```html
|
| +<!doctype html>
|
| +<meta charset="utf-8">
|
| +
|
| +<ol>
|
| + <li value="3">A</li>
|
| + <li value="2">B</li>
|
| + <li value="1">C</li>
|
| +</ol>
|
| +```
|
| +
|
| +## Pixel Tests
|
| +
|
| +`testRunner` APIs such as `window.testRunner.dumpAsTextWithPixelResults()` and
|
| +`window.testRunner.dumpDragImage()` create an image result that is associated
|
| +with the test. The image result is compared against an image baseline, which is
|
| +an `-expected.png` file associated with the test, and the test passes if the
|
| +image result is identical to the baseline, according to a pixel-by-pixel
|
| +comparison. Tests that have image results (and baselines) are called **pixel
|
| +tests**.
|
| +
|
| +Pixel tests should still follow the principles laid out above. Pixel tests pose
|
| +unique challenges to the desire to have *self-describing* and *cross-platform*
|
| +tests. The
|
| +[WPT test style guidelines](http://testthewebforward.org/docs/test-style-guidelines.html)
|
| +contain useful guidance. The most relevant pieces of advice are below.
|
| +
|
| +* Whenever possible, use a green paragraph / page / square to indicate success.
|
| + If that is not possible, make the test self-describing by including a textual
|
| + description of the desired (passing) outcome.
|
| +* Only use the red color or the word `FAIL` to highlight errors. This does not
|
| + apply when testing the color red.
|
| +* Use the [Ahem font](https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/Fonts/Ahem/README) to
|
| + reduce the variance introduced by the platform's text rendering system. This
|
| + does not apply when testing text, text flow, font selection, font fallback,
|
| + font features, or other typographic information.
|
| +
|
| +*** promo
|
| +When using `window.testRunner.dumpAsTextWithPixelResults()`, the image result
|
| +will always be 800x600px, because test pages are rendered in an 800x600px
|
| +viewport. Pixel tests that do not specifically cover scrolling should fit in an
|
| +800x600px viewport without creating scrollbars.
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +The following snippet includes the Ahem font in a layout test.
|
| +
|
| +```html
|
| +<style>
|
| +body {
|
| + font: 10px Ahem;
|
| +}
|
| +</style>
|
| +<script src="/resources/ahem.js"></script>
|
| +```
|
| +
|
| +*** promo
|
| +Tests outside `LayoutTests/http` and `LayoutTests/imported/wpt` currently need
|
| +to use a relative path to
|
| +[/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/resources/ahem.js](../../third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/resources/ahem.js)
|
| +***
|
| +
|
| +### Tests that need to paint, raster, or draw a frame of intermediate output
|
| +
|
| +A layout test does not actually draw frames of output until the test exits.
|
| +Tests that need to generate a painted frame can use
|
| +`window.testRunner.displayAsyncThen`, which will run the machinery to put up a
|
| +frame, then call the passed callback. There is also a library at
|
| +`fast/repaint/resources/text-based-repaint.js` to help with writing paint
|
| +invalidation and repaint tests.
|
| +
|
| +## Dump Render Tree (DRT) Tests
|
| +
|
| +A Dump Render Tree test renders a web page and produces up to two results, which
|
| +are compared against baseline files:
|
| +
|
| +* All tests output a textual representation of Blink's
|
| + [render tree](https://developers.google.com/web/fundamentals/performance/critical-rendering-path/render-tree-construction),
|
| + which is compared against an `-expected.txt` text baseline.
|
| +* Some tests also output the image of the rendered page, which is compared
|
| + against an `-expected.png` image baseline, using the same method as pixel
|
| + tests.
|
| +
|
| +TODO: Document the API used by DRT tests to opt out of producing image results.
|
| +
|
| +A DRT test passes if _all_ of its results match their baselines. Like pixel
|
| +tests, the output of DRT tests depends on platform-specific mechanisms, so DRT
|
| +tests often require per-platform baselines. Furthermore, DRT tests depend on the
|
| +render tree data structure, which means that if we replace the render tree data
|
| +structure, we will need to look at each DRT test and consider whether it is
|
| +still meaningful.
|
| +
|
| +For these reasons, DRT tests should **only** be used to cover aspects of the
|
| +layout code that can only be tested by looking at the render tree. Any
|
| +combination of the other test types is preferable to a DRT test. DRT tests are
|
| +[inherited from WebKit](https://webkit.org/blog/1456/layout-tests-practice/), so
|
| +the repository may have some unfortunate examples of DRT tests.
|
| +
|
| +The following page is an example of a DRT test.
|
| +
|
| +```html
|
| +<!doctype html>
|
| +<meta charset="utf-8">
|
| +<style>
|
| +body { font: 10px Ahem; }
|
| +span::after {
|
| + content: "pass";
|
| + color: green;
|
| +}
|
| +</style>
|
| +<script src="/resources/ahem.js"></script>
|
| +
|
| +<p><span>Pass if a green PASS appears to the right: </span></p>
|
| +```
|
| +
|
| +The most important aspects of the example are that the test page does not
|
| +include a testing framework, and that it follows the guidelines for pixel tests.
|
| +The test page produces the text result below.
|
| +
|
| +```
|
| +layer at (0,0) size 800x600
|
| + LayoutView at (0,0) size 800x600
|
| +layer at (0,0) size 800x30
|
| + LayoutBlockFlow {HTML} at (0,0) size 800x30
|
| + LayoutBlockFlow {BODY} at (8,10) size 784x10
|
| + LayoutBlockFlow {P} at (0,0) size 784x10
|
| + LayoutInline {SPAN} at (0,0) size 470x10
|
| + LayoutText {#text} at (0,0) size 430x10
|
| + text run at (0,0) width 430: "Pass if a green PASS appears to the right: "
|
| + LayoutInline {<pseudo:after>} at (0,0) size 40x10 [color=#008000]
|
| + LayoutTextFragment (anonymous) at (430,0) size 40x10
|
| + text run at (430,0) width 40: "pass"
|
| +```
|
| +
|
| +Notice that the test result above depends on the size of the `<p>` text. The
|
| +test page uses the Ahem font (introduced above), whose main design goal is
|
| +consistent cross-platform rendering. Had the test used another font, its text
|
| +baseline would have depended on the fonts installed on the testing computer, and
|
| +on the platform's font rendering system. Please follow the pixel tests
|
| +guidelines and write reliable DRT tests!
|
| +
|
| +WebKit's render tree is described in
|
| +[a series of posts](https://webkit.org/blog/114/webcore-rendering-i-the-basics/)
|
| +on WebKit's blog. Some of the concepts there still apply to Blink's render tree.
|
| +
|
| +## Directory Structure
|
| +
|
| +The [LayoutTests directory](../../third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests) currently
|
| +lacks a strict, formal structure. The following directories have special
|
| +meaning:
|
| +
|
| +* The `http/` directory hosts tests that require an HTTP server (see above).
|
| +* The `resources/` subdirectory in every directory contains binary files, such
|
| + as media files, and code that is shared by multiple test files.
|
| +
|
| +*** note
|
| +Some layout tests consist of a minimal HTML page that references a JavaScript
|
| +file in `resources/`. Please do not use this pattern for new tests, as it goes
|
| +against the minimality principle. JavaScript and CSS files should only live in
|
| +`resources/` if they are shared by at least two test files.
|
| +***
|
|
|