On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:35:52 AM UTC-4, Andrew Halberstadt wrote:
On 08/29/2012 09:56 AM, Andrew Halberstadt wrote:
On 08/28/2012 02:17 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
On Tuesday 2012-08-28 12:52 -0400, Andrew Halberstadt wrote:
I also don't think we should go quite as small as
== The Problem ==
Reftests currently assume a window size of 800x1000. This is not
possible on mobile devices, and using this resolution on tegras and
pandas consumes too much memory and results in many timeouts and
random-failures.
Changing the resolution to something like 400x400 is very
If the exact width/height could be found for each test then these could
be marked in a manifest (theoretically, not speaking to the existing
reftest manifest format per se). Then reftest could be modified to take
a (e.g.) --resoltuion 400x400 argument and the test runner passing over
any test
I've already done this work but we decided to just increase the
resolution for our tegra board:
See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66
which includes an outdated patch that adds a screen(w,h) annotation to
each test and a patch to compute the required size per test.
On Tue, Aug
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 6:17 AM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
We don't want to be running our reftests at
a size smaller than the accepted max size for reftests at W3C.
What is the current required size for W3C reftests? I can't find any
documentation of that.
Rob
--
“You have
5 matches
Mail list logo
