зеркало из https://github.com/mozilla/gecko-dev.git
Bug 1610422 part 1. Pull in missing upstream changes for RTCPeerConnection-ondatachannel.html. r=jgraham
It looks like most of the changes from https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/16038 we have already, except some whitespace bits. Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D60469 --HG-- extra : moz-landing-system : lando
This commit is contained in:
Boris Zbarsky
Родитель
12ffabd93a
Коммит
5f84a2e9df
|
|
@ -6,12 +6,15 @@
|
|||
<script src="RTCPeerConnection-helper.js"></script>
|
||||
<script>
|
||||
'use strict';
|
||||
|
||||
// Test is based on the following revision:
|
||||
// https://rawgit.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/1cc5bfc3ff18741033d804c4a71f7891242fb5b3/webrtc.html
|
||||
|
||||
// The following helper functions are called from RTCPeerConnection-helper.js:
|
||||
// exchangeIceCandidates
|
||||
// doSignalingHandshake
|
||||
// createDataChannelPair
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
6.2. RTCDataChannel
|
||||
When an underlying data transport is to be announced (the other peer created a channel with
|
||||
|
|
@ -20,11 +23,13 @@
|
|||
2. Let channel be a newly created RTCDataChannel object.
|
||||
7. Set channel's [[ReadyState]] to open (but do not fire the open event, yet).
|
||||
8. Fire a datachannel event named datachannel with channel at the RTCPeerConnection object.
|
||||
|
||||
6.3. RTCDataChannelEvent
|
||||
Firing a datachannel event named e with an RTCDataChannel channel means that an event with the
|
||||
name e, which does not bubble (except where otherwise stated) and is not cancelable (except
|
||||
where otherwise stated), and which uses the RTCDataChannelEvent interface with the channel
|
||||
attribute set to channel, MUST be created and dispatched at the given target.
|
||||
|
||||
interface RTCDataChannelEvent : Event {
|
||||
readonly attribute RTCDataChannel channel;
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
|
@ -35,29 +40,40 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
const pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc1.close());
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc2.close());
|
||||
|
||||
let eventCount = 0;
|
||||
|
||||
pc2.ondatachannel = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
eventCount++;
|
||||
assert_equals(eventCount, 1,
|
||||
'Expect data channel event to fire exactly once');
|
||||
|
||||
assert_true(event instanceof RTCDataChannelEvent,
|
||||
'Expect event to be instance of RTCDataChannelEvent');
|
||||
|
||||
assert_equals(event.bubbles, false);
|
||||
assert_equals(event.cancelable, false);
|
||||
|
||||
const dc = event.channel;
|
||||
assert_true(dc instanceof RTCDataChannel,
|
||||
'Expect channel to be instance of RTCDataChannel');
|
||||
|
||||
// The channel should be in the 'open' state already.
|
||||
// See: https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/1851
|
||||
assert_equals(dc.readyState, 'open',
|
||||
'Expect channel ready state to be open');
|
||||
|
||||
resolver.resolve();
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
pc1.createDataChannel('fire-me!');
|
||||
|
||||
exchangeIceCandidates(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
await doSignalingHandshake(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
|
||||
await resolver;
|
||||
}, 'Data channel event should fire when new data channel is announced to the remote peer');
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
Since the channel should be in the 'open' state when dispatching via the 'datachannel' event,
|
||||
we should be able to send data in the event handler.
|
||||
|
|
@ -68,21 +84,28 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
const pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc1.close());
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc2.close());
|
||||
|
||||
const message = 'meow meow!';
|
||||
|
||||
pc2.ondatachannel = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
const dc2 = event.channel;
|
||||
dc2.send(message);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
const dc1 = pc1.createDataChannel('fire-me!');
|
||||
dc1.onmessage = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
assert_equals(event.data, message,
|
||||
'Received data should be equal to sent data');
|
||||
|
||||
resolver.resolve();
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
exchangeIceCandidates(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
await doSignalingHandshake(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
|
||||
await resolver;
|
||||
}, 'Should be able to send data in a datachannel event handler');
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
6.2. RTCDataChannel
|
||||
When an underlying data transport is to be announced (the other peer created a channel with
|
||||
|
|
@ -97,21 +120,28 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
const pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc1.close());
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc2.close());
|
||||
|
||||
pc2.ondatachannel = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
const dc = event.channel;
|
||||
dc.onopen = t.step_func(() => {
|
||||
assert_unreached('Open event should not fire');
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
// This should prevent triggering the 'open' event
|
||||
dc.close();
|
||||
|
||||
// Wait a bit to ensure the 'open' event does NOT fire
|
||||
t.step_timeout(() => resolver.resolve(), 500);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
pc1.createDataChannel('fire-me!');
|
||||
|
||||
exchangeIceCandidates(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
await doSignalingHandshake(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
|
||||
await resolver;
|
||||
}, 'Open event should not be raised when closing the channel in the datachannel event');
|
||||
|
||||
// Added this test as a result of the discussion in
|
||||
// https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/1851#discussion_r185976747
|
||||
promise_test(async (t) => {
|
||||
|
|
@ -120,11 +150,13 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
const pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc1.close());
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc2.close());
|
||||
|
||||
pc2.ondatachannel = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
const dc = event.channel;
|
||||
dc.onopen = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
resolver.resolve();
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
// This should NOT prevent triggering the 'open' event since it enqueues at least two tasks
|
||||
t.step_timeout(() => {
|
||||
t.step_timeout(() => {
|
||||
|
|
@ -132,12 +164,17 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
}, 1);
|
||||
}, 1);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
pc1.createDataChannel('fire-me!');
|
||||
|
||||
exchangeIceCandidates(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
await doSignalingHandshake(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
|
||||
await resolver;
|
||||
}, 'Open event should be raised when closing the channel in the datachannel event after ' +
|
||||
'enqueuing a task');
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
Combination of the two tests above (send and close).
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
|
@ -147,29 +184,38 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
const pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc1.close());
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc2.close());
|
||||
|
||||
const message = 'meow meow!';
|
||||
|
||||
pc2.ondatachannel = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
const dc2 = event.channel;
|
||||
dc2.onopen = t.step_func(() => {
|
||||
assert_unreached('Open event should not fire');
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
// This should send but still prevent triggering the 'open' event
|
||||
dc2.send(message);
|
||||
dc2.close();
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
const dc1 = pc1.createDataChannel('fire-me!');
|
||||
dc1.onmessage = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
assert_equals(event.data, message,
|
||||
'Received data should be equal to sent data');
|
||||
|
||||
resolver.resolve();
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
exchangeIceCandidates(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
await doSignalingHandshake(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
|
||||
await resolver;
|
||||
}, 'Open event should not be raised when sending and immediately closing the channel in the ' +
|
||||
'datachannel event');
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
6.2. RTCDataChannel
|
||||
|
||||
interface RTCDataChannel : EventTarget {
|
||||
readonly attribute USVString label;
|
||||
readonly attribute boolean ordered;
|
||||
|
|
@ -182,6 +228,7 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
readonly attribute RTCDataChannelState readyState;
|
||||
...
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
When an underlying data transport is to be announced (the other peer created a channel with
|
||||
negotiated unset or set to false), the user agent of the peer that did not initiate the
|
||||
creation process MUST queue a task to run the following steps:
|
||||
|
|
@ -197,20 +244,24 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
value in configuration, [...]
|
||||
7. Set channel's [[ReadyState]] slot to connecting.
|
||||
8. Fire a datachannel event named datachannel with channel at the RTCPeerConnection object.
|
||||
|
||||
Note: More exhaustive tests are defined in RTCDataChannel-dcep
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
promise_test(async (t) => {
|
||||
const resolver = new Resolver();
|
||||
const pc1 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
const pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc1.close());
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc2.close());
|
||||
|
||||
const dc1 = pc1.createDataChannel('test', {
|
||||
ordered: false,
|
||||
maxRetransmits: 1,
|
||||
protocol: 'custom',
|
||||
priority: 'high'
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.label, 'test');
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.ordered, false);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.maxPacketLifeTime, null);
|
||||
|
|
@ -218,10 +269,12 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
assert_equals(dc1.protocol, 'custom');
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.negotiated, false);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.priority, 'high');
|
||||
|
||||
pc2.ondatachannel = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
const dc2 = event.channel;
|
||||
assert_true(dc2 instanceof RTCDataChannel,
|
||||
'Expect channel to be instance of RTCDataChannel');
|
||||
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.label, 'test');
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.ordered, false);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.maxPacketLifeTime, null);
|
||||
|
|
@ -230,20 +283,26 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
assert_equals(dc2.negotiated, false);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.id, dc1.id);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.priority, 'high');
|
||||
|
||||
resolver.resolve();
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
exchangeIceCandidates(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
await doSignalingHandshake(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
|
||||
await resolver;
|
||||
}, 'In-band negotiated channel created on remote peer should match the same configuration as local ' +
|
||||
'peer');
|
||||
|
||||
promise_test(async (t) => {
|
||||
const resolver = new Resolver();
|
||||
const pc1 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
const pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc1.close());
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc2.close());
|
||||
|
||||
const dc1 = pc1.createDataChannel('');
|
||||
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.label, '');
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.ordered, true);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.maxPacketLifeTime, null);
|
||||
|
|
@ -251,10 +310,12 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
assert_equals(dc1.protocol, '');
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.negotiated, false);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc1.priority, 'low');
|
||||
|
||||
pc2.ondatachannel = t.step_func((event) => {
|
||||
const dc2 = event.channel;
|
||||
assert_true(dc2 instanceof RTCDataChannel,
|
||||
'Expect channel to be instance of RTCDataChannel');
|
||||
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.label, '');
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.ordered, true);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.maxPacketLifeTime, null);
|
||||
|
|
@ -263,13 +324,17 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
assert_equals(dc2.negotiated, false);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.id, dc1.id);
|
||||
assert_equals(dc2.priority, 'low');
|
||||
|
||||
resolver.resolve();
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
exchangeIceCandidates(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
await doSignalingHandshake(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
|
||||
await resolver;
|
||||
}, 'In-band negotiated channel created on remote peer should match the same (default) ' +
|
||||
'configuration as local peer');
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
6.2. RTCDataChannel
|
||||
Dictionary RTCDataChannelInit Members
|
||||
|
|
@ -286,24 +351,29 @@ promise_test(async (t) => {
|
|||
const pc2 = new RTCPeerConnection();
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc1.close());
|
||||
t.add_cleanup(() => pc2.close());
|
||||
|
||||
pc2.ondatachannel = t.unreached_func('datachannel event should not be fired');
|
||||
|
||||
pc1.createDataChannel('test', {
|
||||
negotiated: true,
|
||||
id: 42
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
exchangeIceCandidates(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
await doSignalingHandshake(pc1, pc2);
|
||||
|
||||
// Wait a bit to ensure the 'datachannel' event does NOT fire
|
||||
t.step_timeout(() => resolver.resolve(), 500);
|
||||
await resolver;
|
||||
}, 'Negotiated channel should not fire datachannel event on remote peer');
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
Non-testable
|
||||
6.2. RTCDataChannel
|
||||
When an underlying data transport is to be announced
|
||||
1. If the associated RTCPeerConnection object's [[isClosed]] slot
|
||||
is true, abort these steps.
|
||||
|
||||
The above step is not testable because to reach it we would have to
|
||||
close the peer connection just between receiving the in-band negotiated data
|
||||
channel via DCEP and firing the datachannel event.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Загрузка…
Ссылка в новой задаче