Just to circle back on this since the thread was not updated: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/6406078 solved the problem and enabled the tests, and https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/6448729 re-enabled the feature to launch. Per https://chromiumdash.appspot.com/commit/0c93dbbdb1d5ea67bb8946ae6acdbfd20435af53, the feature will ship as intended, in M137. Let me know if I've got anything wrong.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 12:04 PM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote: > Thanks Issack, appreciate it. And good luck with the tests! > On 3/28/25 7:15 PM, 'Issack John' via blink-dev wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > Thank you for your feedback. We've redoubled our efforts to investigate > the root cause of the flakiness and are looping in more people internally > to assist with this. I agree with disabling the feature for now - I will > submit a CL to disable it and will keep you posted on how we plan to move > this feature forward. > > Best, > Issack > On Thursday, March 27, 2025 at 2:07:40 PM UTC-7 mike...@chromium.org > wrote: > >> Thanks Issack. I appreciate you making it a priority to stabilize them. >> However, I would not have approved knowing what I know now - the advice >> would have been "please fix the tests and come back and report." >> >> What is the downside to disabling until we're in that state? >> On 3/27/25 4:57 PM, 'Issack John' via blink-dev wrote: >> >> Hi Dom and Mike, >> >> I have made multiple attempts to debug and resolve the flakiness of these >> tests throughout the development of this feature, and that effort is still >> in progress. >> >> As pointed out, we do have tests, but landing them as enabled has been >> challenging due to long-standing flakiness issues. I believe Adam Rice has >> also attempted to solve this flakiness, as seen in the CRBug: Timeouts >> in ReportingBrowserTest.CrashReport* browser tests [355141780] - Chromium >> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues/355141780> but later had to disable >> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/5961957> the >> test. >> >> Enabling these tests for good is indeed a priority. However, I don't >> believe this should block the I2S. We will continue to work on stabilizing >> the tests and aim to have them enabled as soon as possible. >> On Thursday, March 27, 2025 at 1:33:35 PM UTC-7 mike...@chromium.org >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Dom - that's not a great scenario that I didn't understand when >>> approving. >>> >>> Issack, what is the plan for tests? Are they in progress, or should we >>> unship/not ship the feature until they're ready? >>> On 3/27/25 4:26 PM, Dominic Farolino wrote: >>> >>> Non API OWNER here, but when looking through this feature I noticed that >>> there are no tests for it. This line >>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:chrome/browser/net/reporting_browsertest.cc;l=604-616;drc=2fc66f9ead0532c2b2eb05bd99d16259a6976e09> >>> in >>> reporting_browsertest.cc disables all tests that were once just marked as >>> flaky. >>> >>> Adam Rice pointed this out in the original review here >>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4959773/comment/56b13d2a_3b9d390f/>, >>> and it looks like we tried a follow-up with CL 5422052 >>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/5422052> to >>> enable the tests, but this was reverted in CL 5433594 >>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/5433594> with >>> no obvious attempts to re-enable them. I only raise this because this means >>> there are no web platform tests, *and* no Chromium-specific browser >>> tests, so the feature is not tested at all. Maybe that shouldn't block the >>> I2S, but enabling the tests for good should be a priority, ideally before >>> hitting stable. Please let me know if I'm missing something! >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 2:10 PM 'Issack John' via blink-dev < >>> blin...@chromium.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you all for the reviews! :) >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, March 18, 2025 at 7:32:56 PM UTC-7 vmp...@chromium.org >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> LGTM3 >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, March 18, 2025 at 8:47:30 AM UTC-4 Mike Taylor wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> LGTM2 - I see that Mozilla has proposed a positive position via >>>>>> comment. >>>>>> On 3/17/25 2:25 PM, 'Dan Clark' via blink-dev wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> LGTM1 >>>>>> >>>>>> On Monday, March 17, 2025 at 11:24:06 AM UTC-7 sligh...@chromium.org >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm recused on this one, but would like to see it move forward >>>>>>> quickly. Great work. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Friday, March 14, 2025 at 1:32:38 PM UTC-7 Chromestatus wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Contact emails issac...@microsoft.com, seth.b...@microsoft.com, >>>>>>>> icle...@google.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Explainer >>>>>>>> https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/MSEdgeExplainers/blob/main/CrashReporting/AddStackToCrashReports.md >>>>>>>> https://github.com/WICG/crash-reporting/issues/12 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Specification https://wicg.github.io/crash-reporting >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Design docs >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19DpvHIiYbmB9wgIP0BdI4vOnfVLcAZFmfIAml7SqRQA/edit?usp=sharing >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Summary >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This feature captures the JS call stack when a web page becomes >>>>>>>> unresponsive due to JavaScript code running an infinite loop or other >>>>>>>> very >>>>>>>> long computation. This helps developers to identify the cause of the >>>>>>>> unresponsiveness and fix it more easily. The JS call stack is included >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> the crash reporting API when the reason is unresponsive. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Blink component Chromium > Internals > Network > ReportingAndNEL >>>>>>>> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Chromium%20%3E%20Internals%20%3E%20Network%20%3E%20ReportingAndNEL%22> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> TAG review https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/981 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> TAG review status Issues addressed >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Origin Trial Name Call stacks in crash reports >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Chromium Trial Name >>>>>>>> DocumentPolicyIncludeJSCallStacksInCrashReports >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Origin Trial documentation link >>>>>>>> https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/MSEdgeExplainers/blob/main/CrashReporting/AddStackToCrashReports.md >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> WebFeature UseCounter name >>>>>>>> kDocumentPolicyIncludeJSCallStacksInCrashReports >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Risks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "The stack trace format itself is not compatible across browsers." >>>>>>>> However, "It is already exposed throughout the web platform (via the >>>>>>>> `error.stack` getter), and there is already a lot of software, both >>>>>>>> client- >>>>>>>> and server-side, which deals with parsing the different browsers' >>>>>>>> formats." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Gecko*: No signal ( >>>>>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1057) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *WebKit*: No signal ( >>>>>>>> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/380) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Web developers*: Positive >>>>>>>> https://github.com/denoland/deno/issues/26919#issuecomment-2584648202 >>>>>>>> https://github.com/WICG/crash-reporting/issues/21 >>>>>>>> https://github.com/electron/electron/issues/45356#issuecomment-2635086589 >>>>>>>> https://github.com/electron/electron/pull/44204#discussion_r1845994904 >>>>>>>> https://github.com/TurboWarp/desktop/issues/1113 >>>>>>>> https://github.com/getsentry/sentry-javascript/pull/14044#issuecomment-2468480434 >>>>>>>> https://www.electronjs.org/blog/electron-34-0#unresponsive-renderer-javascript-call-stacks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Other signals*: Origin trial participants have found the feature >>>>>>>> useful, and their feedback has been positive. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Security >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Stack frames from cross-domain scripts that were not loaded with >>>>>>>> CORS are omitted. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> WebView application risks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, >>>>>>>> such that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based >>>>>>>> applications? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No, the feature does not deprecate or change the behavior of >>>>>>>> existing APIs such that it has potentially high risk for Android >>>>>>>> WebView-based applications. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Debuggability >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Developers can launch DevTools, go to the "Application" Tab, then >>>>>>>> in the "Background services" section click on "Reporting API" where >>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>> can inspect reports that are queued to be sent. Application --> >>>>>>>> Reporting >>>>>>>> API >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, >>>>>>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)? Yes >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>>>>>> ? No >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This feature is not currently testable on WPT, since triggering it >>>>>>>> requires crashing the browser. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> DevTrial instructions >>>>>>>> https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/MSEdgeExplainers/blob/main/CrashReporting/HOWTO.md >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Flag name on about://flags >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Finch feature name DocumentPolicyIncludeJSCallStacksInCrashReports >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Requires code in //chrome? False >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tracking bug >>>>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1445539 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Availability expectation Initially the feature will only be >>>>>>>> available in Chromium browsers. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Non-OSS dependencies >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Does the feature depend on any code or APIs outside the Chromium >>>>>>>> open source repository and its open-source dependencies to function? >>>>>>>> No. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Estimated milestones >>>>>>>> Shipping on desktop 136 >>>>>>>> Origin trial desktop first 127 >>>>>>>> Origin trial desktop last 132 >>>>>>>> Origin trial extension 1 end milestone 135 >>>>>>>> DevTrial on desktop 125 >>>>>>>> Shipping on Android 136 >>>>>>>> Origin trial Android first 127 >>>>>>>> Origin trial Android last 132 >>>>>>>> DevTrial on Android 125 >>>>>>>> Shipping on WebView 136 >>>>>>>> Origin trial WebView first 127 >>>>>>>> Origin trial WebView last 132 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Anticipated spec changes >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat >>>>>>>> or interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github >>>>>>>> issues in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution >>>>>>>> may >>>>>>>> introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or >>>>>>>> structure of >>>>>>>> the API in a non-backward-compatible way). >>>>>>>> None >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/4731248572628992?gate=5150803040141312 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Links to previous Intent discussions Intent to Prototype: >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/MW2PPF6784DDB763E2DA7BFC75AE51613ABC27B2%40MW2PPF6784DDB76.namprd00.prod.outlook.com >>>>>>>> Ready for Trial: >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/aVpeVRO1Sy4 >>>>>>>> Intent to Experiment: >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/f43b4e9f-5af8-4c4b-bcd9-342332dd57edn%40chromium.org >>>>>>>> Intent to Extend Experiment 1: >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/67819b5d.2b0a0220.275672.09ce.GAE%40google.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com>. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>> >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> To view this discussion visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/1f369b7c-91f2-4074-a902-1cefdeaa7dfbn%40chromium.org >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/1f369b7c-91f2-4074-a902-1cefdeaa7dfbn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>> To view this discussion visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/ca68fda3-fe34-4485-836b-80615059c0ebn%40chromium.org >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/ca68fda3-fe34-4485-836b-80615059c0ebn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "blink-dev" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >> >> To view this discussion visit >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/e9ccccb6-f655-42b3-8e57-e3789a2fe6den%40chromium.org >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/e9ccccb6-f655-42b3-8e57-e3789a2fe6den%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "blink-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/14f95d19-7c20-4c71-8370-e527341df62an%40chromium.org > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/14f95d19-7c20-4c71-8370-e527341df62an%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAP-uykCuDcy00hR6_jqKhaJf2OVC5G5RPO28dPCOwJ6eY3qf1Q%40mail.gmail.com.
