Skip to content

Conversation

ErichDonGubler
Copy link
Member

LogMessageWithStack.toRawData's entire purpose is to sanitize the postMessage call inside reportTestResults, which it is definitely not doing in the case of extra. Strip anything not serializable using JSON.stringify and JSON.parse.

Without this, we get failures in worker contexts when extra debugging is specified for tests.

Issue: #4172


Requirements for PR author:

  • All missing test coverage is tracked with "TODO" or .unimplemented().
  • New helpers are /** documented */ and new helper files are found in helper_index.txt.
  • Test behaves as expected in a WebGPU implementation. (If not passing, explain above.)
  • Test have be tested with compatibility mode validation enabled and behave as expected. (If not passing, explain above.)

Requirements for reviewer sign-off:

  • Tests are properly located in the test tree.
  • Test descriptions allow a reader to "read only the test plans and evaluate coverage completeness", and accurately reflect the test code.
  • Tests provide complete coverage (including validation control cases). Missing coverage MUST be covered by TODOs.
  • Helpers and types promote readability and maintainability.

When landing this PR, be sure to make any necessary issue status updates.

@ErichDonGubler ErichDonGubler added the bug Something isn't working label Mar 11, 2025
@ErichDonGubler ErichDonGubler self-assigned this Mar 11, 2025
@ErichDonGubler ErichDonGubler force-pushed the strip-extra-worker-unfriendliness branch 2 times, most recently from c61b0fc to b8e9c7b Compare March 11, 2025 17:49
…ithStack.toRawData`

`LogMessageWithStack.toRawData`'s entire purpose is to sanitize the
`postMessage` call inside `reportTestResults`, which it is definitely
not doing in the case of `extra`. Strip anything not serializable using
`JSON.stringify` and `JSON.parse`.

Without this, we get failures in worker contexts when extra debugging is
specified for tests.
@ErichDonGubler ErichDonGubler force-pushed the strip-extra-worker-unfriendliness branch from b8e9c7b to 593e7c8 Compare March 11, 2025 17:54
Copy link
Collaborator

@kainino0x kainino0x left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you!

@kainino0x kainino0x merged commit 62fb42e into gpuweb:main Mar 11, 2025
1 check passed
@ErichDonGubler ErichDonGubler deleted the strip-extra-worker-unfriendliness branch March 12, 2025 18:06
ErichDonGubler added a commit to erichdongubler-mozilla/gecko-dev that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2025
…a2854cb5bee8b r=#webgpu-reviewers!

The only change this patch brings is the consumption of a PR I authored
to work around runtime errors when a failure incorrectly tries to return
an error object with methods inside its `extra` field to the content
context.

See [gpuweb/cts#4287] for more details.

[gpuweb/cts#4287]: gpuweb/cts#4287

Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D241076
moz-v2v-gh pushed a commit to mozilla/gecko-dev that referenced this pull request Mar 14, 2025
…a2854cb5bee8b r=webgpu-reviewers,nical

The only change this patch brings is the consumption of a PR I authored
to work around runtime errors when a failure incorrectly tries to return
an error object with methods inside its `extra` field to the content
context.

See [gpuweb/cts#4287] for more details.

[gpuweb/cts#4287]: gpuweb/cts#4287

Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D241076
jamienicol pushed a commit to jamienicol/gecko that referenced this pull request Mar 18, 2025
…a2854cb5bee8b r=webgpu-reviewers,nical

The only change this patch brings is the consumption of a PR I authored
to work around runtime errors when a failure incorrectly tries to return
an error object with methods inside its `extra` field to the content
context.

See [gpuweb/cts#4287] for more details.

[gpuweb/cts#4287]: gpuweb/cts#4287

Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D241076
jwidar pushed a commit to jwidar/LatencyZeroGithub that referenced this pull request Sep 16, 2025
…a2854cb5bee8b r=webgpu-reviewers,nical

The only change this patch brings is the consumption of a PR I authored
to work around runtime errors when a failure incorrectly tries to return
an error object with methods inside its `extra` field to the content
context.

See [gpuweb/cts#4287] for more details.

[gpuweb/cts#4287]: gpuweb/cts#4287

Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D241076
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bug Something isn't working

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants