Fix e2e error #2447
Fix e2e error #2447
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces changes to the configuration of the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
e2e/case/multi-camera-no-clear.ts (1)
25-26: LGTM! Disabling antialias is appropriate for e2e testsThe addition of
antialias: falseis a good practice for e2e tests as it ensures consistent rendering across different test environments by eliminating browser-specific antialiasing variations.Consider documenting this configuration requirement in the e2e testing guidelines to ensure other test cases follow the same pattern for consistent results.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
e2e/fixtures/originImage/Advance_multi-camera-no-clear.jpgis excluded by!**/*.jpg
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
e2e/case/multi-camera-no-clear.ts(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
e2e/case/multi-camera-no-clear.ts (1)
68-68: LGTM! Reducing MSAA samples complements the antialiasing changes
The reduction of msaaSamples to 1 aligns well with the disabled antialiasing at the engine level, ensuring consistent rendering across different test environments.
Please verify that the visual quality remains acceptable for the test case. You might want to compare the screenshot outputs with and without these changes:
✅ Verification successful
Let me verify if there are any other related files or changes that might help us understand the context better.
LGTM! MSAA sample reduction is consistent with the rendering pipeline
The change to reduce msaaSamples to 1 is verified to be correct because:
- It aligns with the rendering pipeline's implementation in
BasicRenderPipeline.tswheremsaaSamples === 1is a requirement for usingblitFrameBufferin WebGL2 - The test case has a baseline image at
e2e/fixtures/originImage/Advance_multi-camera-no-clear.jpgfor comparison - The camera's HDR and post-processing setup will still work correctly with MSAA samples set to 1
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if there are any existing baseline screenshots for comparison
# Look for screenshot baselines or results
fd -e png -e jpg . | grep -i "multi-camera-no-clear"
Length of output: 111
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any related test configurations or setup files
rg -l "multi-camera-no-clear" --type ts
# Look for any camera-related MSAA configurations
rg "msaaSamples" --type ts -C 2
Length of output: 2772
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2447 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 70.60% 70.55% -0.05%
==========================================
Files 526 526
Lines 27628 27628
Branches 4160 4160
==========================================
- Hits 19506 19494 -12
- Misses 6561 6573 +12
Partials 1561 1561
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)
Other information:
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes