From: Francois Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com
Wine-Bug: https://bugs.winehq.org//show_bug.cgi?id=53460 --- dlls/advapi32/tests/service.c | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/dlls/advapi32/tests/service.c b/dlls/advapi32/tests/service.c index fbb18b048a0..7d84e4c0f7d 100644 --- a/dlls/advapi32/tests/service.c +++ b/dlls/advapi32/tests/service.c @@ -1339,6 +1339,7 @@ static void test_enum_svc(void) services, bufsize, &needed, &returned, &resume); ok(ret, "Expected success, got error %lu\n", GetLastError()); ok(needed == 0, "Expected needed buffer to be 0 as we are done\n"); + flaky todo_wine ok(returned == missing, "Expected %lu services to be returned\n", missing); ok(resume == 0, "Expected the resume handle to be 0\n"); HeapFree(GetProcessHeap(), 0, services); @@ -1420,7 +1421,9 @@ static void test_enum_svc(void) } HeapFree(GetProcessHeap(), 0, services);
+ flaky ok(servicecountactive == 0, "Active services mismatch %lu\n", servicecountactive); + flaky ok(servicecountinactive == 0, "Inactive services mismatch %lu\n", servicecountinactive);
CloseServiceHandle(scm_handle); @@ -1609,6 +1612,7 @@ static void test_enum_svc(void) (BYTE*)exservices, bufsize, &needed, &returned, NULL, NULL); ok(ret, "Expected success, got error %lu\n", GetLastError()); ok(needed == 0, "Expected needed buffer to be 0 as we are done\n"); + flaky ok(returned == tempreturned, "Expected the same number of service from this function\n"); HeapFree(GetProcessHeap(), 0, exservices);
@@ -1726,6 +1730,7 @@ static void test_enum_svc(void) if (status.dwCurrentState != SERVICE_STOPPED) { /* We expect a process id for every running service */ + flaky ok(status.dwProcessId > 0, "Expected a process id for this running service (%s)\n", exservices[i].lpServiceName);
@@ -1743,7 +1748,9 @@ static void test_enum_svc(void) } HeapFree(GetProcessHeap(), 0, exservices);
+ flaky ok(servicecountactive == 0, "Active services mismatch %lu\n", servicecountactive); + flaky ok(servicecountinactive == 0, "Inactive services mismatch %lu\n", servicecountinactive);
CloseServiceHandle(scm_handle);
Hi,
It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated.
The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=124688
Your paranoid android.
=== w8 (32 bit report) ===
advapi32: service.c:1616: Test marked flaky: Expected the same number of service from this function
Report validation errors: advapi32:service has unaccounted for failure messages advapi32:service returned success despite having failures
From: Francois Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com
Wine-Bug: https://bugs.winehq.org//show_bug.cgi?id=52939 --- dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c b/dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c index 55a8074f1b7..10ca4b51fd9 100644 --- a/dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c +++ b/dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c @@ -3469,6 +3469,7 @@ static DWORD WINAPI notify_change_thread(void *arg)
ret = RegNotifyChangeKeyValue(data->key, TRUE, REG_NOTIFY_CHANGE_NAME|data->flags, data->event, TRUE); + flaky ok(ret == ERROR_SUCCESS, "expected ERROR_SUCCESS, got %ld\n", ret); return 0; } @@ -3597,6 +3598,7 @@ static void test_RegNotifyChangeKeyValue(void) ok(ret == ERROR_SUCCESS, "expected ERROR_SUCCESS, got %ld\n", ret);
dwret = WaitForSingleObject(event, 0); + flaky ok(dwret == WAIT_OBJECT_0, "expected WAIT_OBJECT_0, got %lu\n", dwret);
RegDeleteKeyA(key, "SubKey");
From: Francois Gouget fgouget@codeweavers.com
Wine-Bug: https://bugs.winehq.org//show_bug.cgi?id=53172 --- dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c b/dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c index 10ca4b51fd9..763ba3101ae 100644 --- a/dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c +++ b/dlls/advapi32/tests/registry.c @@ -555,6 +555,7 @@ static void test_enum_value(void) /* v5.1.2600.0 (XP Home and Professional) does not touch value or data in this case */ ok( !strcmp( value, "Te" ) || !strcmp( value, "xxxxxxxxxx" ), "value set to '%s' instead of 'Te' or 'xxxxxxxxxx'\n", value ); + flaky ok( !strcmp( data, "foobar" ) || !strcmp( data, "xxxxxxx" ) || broken( data_count > 7 && strspn( data, "x" ) == data_count && data[data_count] == 0 ), "data set to '%s' instead of 'foobar' or x's, data_count=%lu\n", data, data_count );
Hi,
It looks like your patch introduced the new failures shown below. Please investigate and fix them before resubmitting your patch. If they are not new, fixing them anyway would help a lot. Otherwise please ask for the known failures list to be updated.
The tests also ran into some preexisting test failures. If you know how to fix them that would be helpful. See the TestBot job for the details:
The full results can be found at: https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=124690
Your paranoid android.
=== w10pro64_en_AE_u8 (64 bit report) ===
advapi32: registry.c:559: Test marked flaky: data set to 'xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' instead of 'foobar' or x's, data_count=21
Report validation errors: advapi32:registry returned success despite having failures
This merge request was closed by Francois Gouget.
-
Francois Gouget -
Francois Gouget (＠fgouget)
-
Marvin