From 6ddf50a77b1371a9bd27d70818eaff9ace9ddd80 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Edmundson Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 01:41:16 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] [autotests] Fail faster on test which fails anyway Summary: The .wait() in this case isn't really time depdenent, we just need to process the event loop. Given we know this tests fails, there's no point me waiting 30s. Test Plan: Test failed, but faster Reviewers: #kwin, zzag Reviewed By: #kwin, zzag Subscribers: kwin Tags: #kwin Differential Revision: https://phabricator.kde.org/D19351 --- autotests/integration/shell_client_test.cpp | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/autotests/integration/shell_client_test.cpp b/autotests/integration/shell_client_test.cpp index c398592690..7b4ec3c11d 100644 --- a/autotests/integration/shell_client_test.cpp +++ b/autotests/integration/shell_client_test.cpp @@ -938,7 +938,7 @@ void TestShellClient::testWindowOpensLargerThanScreen() QCOMPARE(c->clientSize(), screens()->size(0)); QVERIFY(c->isDecorated()); QEXPECT_FAIL("", "BUG 366632", Continue); - QVERIFY(sizeChangeRequestedSpy.wait()); + QVERIFY(sizeChangeRequestedSpy.wait(10)); } void TestShellClient::testHidden_data()