content: No need to initialize ResourceBundle with ui_test.pak.

content: No need to initialize ResourceBundle with ui_test.pak.

There seems to be no good reason to initialize ResourceBundle with
ui_test.pak for content_unittests only when use_aura is set or the
platform is Windows. It runs fine without this code, so this patch
removes this initialization.

This was tested with (on a Linux x86_64 box):

$ rm -rf out/Debug
$ ./build/gyp_chromium
$ ninja -C out/Debug content_unittests
$ out/Debug/content_unittests --test-launcher-bot-mode

BUG=None
TEST=see above
R=tony@chromium.org
TBR=jochen@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=276009

[tfarina, 2014-06-06 06:34:00]

Jochen -> owners
Tony -> sanity check

am I missing something? Is this OK/safe?

Is this necessary for some layout test?

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2014-06-06 06:52:38]

On 2014/06/06 06:34:00, tfarina wrote:
> Jochen -> owners
> Tony -> sanity check
> 
> am I missing something? Is this OK/safe?
> 
> Is this necessary for some layout test?

layout tests don't use the content test suite. let's wait what trybots have to
say

[tony, 2014-06-06 16:51:10]

On 2014/06/06 06:52:38, jochen traveling until Jun 23 wrote:
> On 2014/06/06 06:34:00, tfarina wrote:
> > Jochen -> owners
> > Tony -> sanity check
> > 
> > am I missing something? Is this OK/safe?
> > 
> > Is this necessary for some layout test?
> 
> layout tests don't use the content test suite. let's wait what trybots have to
> say

It looks like webkit_unit_tests and content_unit_tests started to fail.

[tfarina, 2014-06-06 17:08:00]

On 2014/06/06 16:51:10, tony wrote:
> On 2014/06/06 06:52:38, jochen traveling until Jun 23 wrote:
> > On 2014/06/06 06:34:00, tfarina wrote:
> > > Jochen -> owners
> > > Tony -> sanity check
> > > 
> > > am I missing something? Is this OK/safe?
> > > 
> > > Is this necessary for some layout test?
> > 
> > layout tests don't use the content test suite. let's wait what trybots have
to
> > say
> 
> It looks like webkit_unit_tests and content_unit_tests started to fail.

If I'm understanding this right, and if I'm right, I'm very surprised that
webkit_unit_tests, in a lower layer, depends on content for setting its unit
tests.

But the found is interesting:

[5036:4984:0605/235804:2028200:FATAL:dpi.cc(175)] Check failed: 0.0f !=
g_device_scale_factor (0 vs. 0)

The failures for content_unittests are Win/Aura only it seems.

failures:
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.FullscreenResize
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.DestroyPopupClickOutsidePopup
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.UpdateCursorIfOverSelf
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.OutputSurfaceIdChange
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.SkippedDelegatedFrames
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.SoftwareDPIChange
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.VisibleViewportTest
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.DiscardDelegatedFramesWithLocking
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.CursorVisibilityChange
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraCopyRequestTest.DestroyedAfterCopyRequest
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.FocusFullscreen
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.PositionChildPopup
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.Resize
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.SwapNotifiesWindow
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.DestroyPopupTapOutsidePopup
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.PhysicalBackingSizeWithScale
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.DiscardDelegatedFrames
RenderWidgetHostViewAuraTest.DestroyFullscreenOnBlur

http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...

The Mac/Linux bots seems to be fine.

Based on the failure, I think we can just call ui::win::InitDeviceScaleFactor().


Tony, what you think?

Something like as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/chromium/+/trunk/ui/compositor/tes...
does.

[tony, 2014-06-06 17:11:45]

Sounds reasonable to me.

[tfarina, 2014-06-06 23:14:16]

Changed to gfx::InitDeviceScaleFactor. ptal

[tfarina, 2014-06-08 01:03:22]

Tony, I ran layout tests with bot's command line, which was:

$ python third_party/WebKit/Tools/Scripts/run-webkit-tests --no-show-results
--no-new-test-results --full-results-html --clobber-old-results
--exit-after-n-failures 5000 --exit-after-n-crashes-or-timeouts 100
--debug-rwt-logging --results-directory layout-test-results  --child-processes=1
--additional-drt-flag="--no-sandbox" --nocheck-sys-deps --target Debug

The test result is:

=> Results: 32196/32352 tests passed (99.5%)

=> Tests to be fixed (359):
     91 text-only failures       (25.3%)
     47 image-only failures      (13.1%)
      4 image and text failures  ( 1.1%)
     10 timeouts                 ( 2.8%)
      4 crashes                  ( 1.1%)

=> Tests that will only be fixed if they crash (WONTFIX) (608):


Expected to timeout, but passed: (1)
  inspector/profiler/canvas2d/canvas-replay-log-grid.html

Expected to fail, but passed: (1)
  fast/dom/StyleSheet/gc-declaration-parent-rule.html


Unexpected flakiness: text-only failures (3)
  fast/dom/Geolocation/cached-position-called-once.html [ Failure Pass ]
  http/tests/navigation/pending-location-change-assert.html [ Failure Pass ]
  http/tests/security/redirect-BLOCKED-to-localURL.html [ Failure Pass ]

Unexpected flakiness: crashes (1)
  webaudio/mediaelementaudiosourcenode-gc.html [ Crash Pass ]


Regressions: Unexpected text-only failures (4)
  fast/workers/storage/test-authorizer-sync.html [ Failure ]
  fast/workers/storage/test-authorizer.html [ Failure ]
  storage/websql/sql-error-codes.html [ Failure ]
  storage/websql/test-authorizer.html [ Failure ]

Regressions: Unexpected image-only failures (7)
  media/video-aspect-ratio.html [ ImageOnlyFailure ]
  media/video-colorspace-yuv420.html [ ImageOnlyFailure ]
  media/video-colorspace-yuv422.html [ ImageOnlyFailure ]
  media/video-layer-crash.html [ ImageOnlyFailure ]
  media/video-transformed.html [ ImageOnlyFailure ]
  media/video-zoom-controls.html [ ImageOnlyFailure ]
  media/video-zoom.html [ ImageOnlyFailure ]

[tony, 2014-06-08 19:23:54]

LGTM

On 2014/06/08 01:03:22, tfarina wrote:
> Tony, I ran layout tests with bot's command line, which was:

Why not use the try bots?

[tfarina, 2014-06-08 19:50:38]

On 2014/06/08 19:23:54, tony wrote:
> LGTM
> 
> On 2014/06/08 01:03:22, tfarina wrote:
> > Tony, I ran layout tests with bot's command line, which was:
> 
> Why not use the try bots?

I did ;)

I was just reporting that I verified that it works locally, because at patch set
2, blink bots were red (now we know that it was unrelated to my change).

[tfarina, 2014-06-10 03:46:54]

The CQ bit was checked by tfarina@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-10 03:48:30]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tfarina@chromium.org/317323003/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-10 13:35:26]

Change committed as 276009