RESOLVED FIXED 88750
XHR with .responseType=blob returns 0 size blob 
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88750
Summary XHR with .responseType=blob returns 0 size blob
Taiju Tsuiki
Reported 2012-06-10 21:51:14 PDT
XHR with .responseType = 'blob' returns Blob, but its .size is set to 0.
Attachments
failcase (315 bytes, text/html)
2012-06-10 21:51 PDT, Taiju Tsuiki 		no flags
Details
+reading blob with FileReader (549 bytes, text/html)
2012-06-10 22:01 PDT, Taiju Tsuiki 		no flags
Details
Patch (4.53 KB, patch)
2012-06-11 07:38 PDT, Kinuko Yasuda 		ap: review+
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Taiju Tsuiki
Comment 1 2012-06-10 21:51:44 PDT
Created attachment 146779 [details] failcase
Taiju Tsuiki
Comment 2 2012-06-10 22:01:55 PDT
Created attachment 146780 [details] +reading blob with FileReader Note that, we can read this blob with FileReader, even if its size is 0.
Kinuko Yasuda
Comment 3 2012-06-11 07:38:03 PDT
Created attachment 146854 [details] Patch
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 4 2012-06-11 13:58:42 PDT
Comment on attachment 146854 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=146854&action=review > Source/WebCore/xml/XMLHttpRequest.cpp:287 > if (m_binaryResponseBuilder.get()) { This is old code, but this ".get()" is unnecessary, and should be removed sooner or later.
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 5 2012-06-11 13:59:01 PDT
<rdar://problem/11640154>
Kinuko Yasuda
Comment 6 2012-06-11 21:58:25 PDT
(In reply to comment #4) > (From update of attachment 146854 [details]) > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=146854&action=review > > > Source/WebCore/xml/XMLHttpRequest.cpp:287 > > if (m_binaryResponseBuilder.get()) { > > This is old code, but this ".get()" is unnecessary, and should be removed sooner or later. Thanks, will delete .get() before landing.
Kinuko Yasuda
Comment 7 2012-06-11 23:18:02 PDT
Committed r120042: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/120042>
János Badics
Comment 8 2012-06-12 01:03:56 PDT
Unfortunately this new test fails on every bots since it was introduced in 120042. See https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88844
Kinuko Yasuda
Comment 9 2012-06-12 01:43:15 PDT
(In reply to comment #8) > Unfortunately this new test fails on every bots since it was introduced in 120042. See https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88844 It looks it's passing at least on chromium. (In reply to comment #8) > Unfortunately this new test fails on every bots since it was introduced in 120042. See https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88844 Sorry for the breakage, I'll take a look. (At least it's passing on chromium?)
János Badics
Comment 10 2012-06-12 01:46:34 PDT
> It looks it's passing at least on chromium. (In reply to comment #8) > Sorry for the breakage, I'll take a look. (At least it's passing on chromium?) I'm sorry, it passes only on chromium : )
Kinuko Yasuda
Comment 11 2012-06-12 02:02:38 PDT
(In reply to comment #10) > > It looks it's passing at least on chromium. (In reply to comment #8) > > Sorry for the breakage, I'll take a look. (At least it's passing on chromium?) > I'm sorry, it passes only on chromium : ) It looks like XHR_RESPONSE_BLOB is not enabled on those platforms and I needed to add the test to Skipped for them. I'm going to make Skipped changes while I'll take another look.
Mario Sanchez Prada
Comment 12 2012-06-12 04:50:14 PDT
(In reply to comment #11) > [...] > It looks like XHR_RESPONSE_BLOB is not enabled on those platforms and I needed > to add the test to Skipped for them. > I'm going to make Skipped changes while I'll take another look. I think it would have been better to have filed a bug and use BUGWK###### instead of BUGWKGTK SKIP in the expectations file, so we have a clue were to look at when unskipping it. Already did it: http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/120059 (new bug reported: 88859)
Kinuko Yasuda
Comment 13 2012-06-12 04:55:39 PDT
(In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #11) > > [...] > > It looks like XHR_RESPONSE_BLOB is not enabled on those platforms and I needed > > to add the test to Skipped for them. > > I'm going to make Skipped changes while I'll take another look. > > I think it would have been better to have filed a bug and use BUGWK###### instead of BUGWKGTK SKIP in the expectations file, so we have a clue were to look at when unskipping it. > > Already did it: http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/120059 (new bug reported: 88859) Thanks for doing this!! I was going to file a new bug but must have done so when I update Skipped/TestExpectations.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.