<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Darin Adler <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:darin@apple.com" target="_blank">darin@apple.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">> On Jan 22, 2015, at 12:58 PM, Dirk Pranke <<a href="mailto:dpranke@chromium.org">dpranke@chromium.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Of course, Chromium was more willing to incur the cost of keeping all of the pixel tests up to date when trivial things changed the output<br>
<br>
</span>This comment, and much of the discussion, seems to be about pixel tests. But what does this have to do with reference tests?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The message has nothing to do with whether the test is a pixel test or a ref test.</div><div><br></div><div>My reply was intended to explain why we had the "hashes didn't match but diff passed" message, and the discrepancy around fuzzy matching; on the Chromium ports, if run-webkit-tests had printed this message, it would've served as a warning to the user/developer that there was something weird going on.</div><div><br></div><div>If you all decide you wanted to keep fuzzy matching enabled (and hence that message would happen regularly and could be safely ignored), I would either delete the message outright or at least make it be a debug message.</div><div><br></div><div>You could also decide you wanted to do fuzzy matching only on ref tests, or only on pixel tests, and change the logic accordingly, of course.</div><div><br></div><div>-- Dirk</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>