Run update-test-expectations to remove stale flaky expectations.

Run update-test-expectations to remove stale flaky expectations.

The Tools/Scripts/update-test-expectations looks at recent test results
from test-results.appspot.com and removes flaky expectations for tests
that appear to have been consistently passing.

BUG=498539, 575766, 652536, 658305, 663838, 663840, 663848, 663851, 663853, 663855, 663858, 663872, 663874, 663876, 663877, 663879, 664817, 664819, 664839, 664840, 664841, 664842, 664844, 664846, 664849, 664850, 664852, 664853, 664855, 664856, 664857, 664859, 669693, 671477, 671480, 671618, 672204, 672493, 673003, 673296, 673632, 674858, 676063, 677145

[qyearsley, 2016-12-27 20:41:03]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-12-27 20:41:16]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-12-27 21:43:10]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-12-27 21:43:11]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[qyearsley, 2016-12-28 17:44:11]

qyearsley@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ bokan@chromium.org, tkent@chromium.org

[bokan, 2016-12-30 20:03:42]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2604833002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/TestExpectations (left):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2604833002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/TestExpectations:2196: crbug.com/674858 [ Linux ]
virtual/threaded/printing/offscreencanvas-2d-printing.html [ Pass Failure Crash
]
http://test-results.appspot.com/dashboards/flakiness_dashboard.html#testType=...
shows this as crashing flakily on the Trusty Leak bot. Presumably we're ignoring
the leak bot for some reason but I don't think we should be.

[tkent, 2017-01-02 09:54:41]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2604833002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/TestExpectations (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2604833002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/TestExpectations:2146: # ====== Random order
flaky tests from here ======
This CL removes many entries for random-order flakiness.  Is it ok to remove
them?

[qyearsley, 2017-01-02 20:22:33]

On 2017/01/02 at 09:54:41, tkent wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2604833002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
> File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/TestExpectations (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2604833002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
> third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/TestExpectations:2146: # ====== Random order
flaky tests from here ======
> This CL removes many entries for random-order flakiness.  Is it ok to remove
them?

Ah, good point - depending on platform, the latest results from the
chromium.webkit builders may not reflect random order expectations, so removing
them may be incorrect.

There's no rush to do any of this, so the easiest thing to do is to not commit
this CL, and run the update-test-expectations script again sometime later after
we're sure that we've used default random order for some time. Thanks for
pointing this out!

On 2016/12/30 at 20:03:42, bokan wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2604833002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
> File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/TestExpectations (left):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2604833002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
> third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/TestExpectations:2196: crbug.com/674858 [ Linux
] virtual/threaded/printing/offscreencanvas-2d-printing.html [ Pass Failure
Crash ]
>
http://test-results.appspot.com/dashboards/flakiness_dashboard.html#testType=...
shows this as crashing flakily on the Trusty Leak bot. Presumably we're ignoring
the leak bot for some reason but I don't think we should be.

Right - right now in the update-test-expectations script, I think we get one
builder per configuration based on the config/builders.py file, and I don't
think that the Leak builder is there. Putting the Leak builder in there may
change the behavior of rebaseline-o-matic, but depending on how it's done, maybe
not.

Filed bug http://crbug.com/677844 for this idea. :-)