Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Workaround issue send_key 'ret' for desktop_runner.pm #5275

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Workaround issue send_key 'ret' for desktop_runner.pm #5275

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Zaoliang
Copy link
Contributor

Copy link
Member

@okurz okurz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Unfortunately your change does not make any sense and would break all tests except desktop_runner. Besides, for a sporadic issue I suggest to not just provide a single job for verification. We already discussed this in the last review meeting: First reproduce with good statistics, then fix and verify with good statistics. If we can not reproduce the original issue or do not yet understand what the problem is we should also not try to change any test code

send_key 'ret';
# sometimes send_key 'ret' doesn't work because of low performance
# so workaround this with repeat send_key can help
send_key_until_needlematch 'generic-desktop', "ret", 5, 5;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This will not work in general as 'generic-desktop' is only the very specific target we want to reach in case of the desktop runner test module. And also I do not think we should recheck the final screen we want to screen more than needed. As every post_run_hook of x11test based test modules would check for generic-desktop anyway we would do it twice. So besides that this idea in general does not make sense and can not work I would ensure that in the post_run_hook the desktop is only looked for if the last match was not already exactly that

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

okay, then no changes here. I don't know a better to workaround issue related on openQA production server. The statistic shows only problem with low performance on server.

@Zaoliang
Copy link
Contributor Author

close this PR for now.

@Zaoliang Zaoliang closed this Jun 22, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants