[PATCH 2/2] user32/tests: Fix broadcast test failures on Windows 10

[Alex Henrie]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 2:47 AM Huw Davies <huw at codeweavers.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 11:26:21PM -0600, Alex Henrie wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24 at gmail.com>
> > ---
> > The failing tests lack permissions or use invalid combinations of flags,
> > so it's not too surprising that the behavior changed.
> >
> >  dlls/user32/tests/broadcast.c | 50
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> >  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/dlls/user32/tests/broadcast.c
b/dlls/user32/tests/broadcast.c
> > index afdb536816..851c47eb96 100644
> > --- a/dlls/user32/tests/broadcast.c
> > +++ b/dlls/user32/tests/broadcast.c
> > @@ -131,8 +131,9 @@ if (0) /* TODO: Check the hang flags */
> >      recips = BSM_APPLICATIONS;
> >      ResetEvent(hevent);
> >      ret = broadcast( BSF_POSTMESSAGE|BSF_QUERY, &recips, WM_NULL, 100,
0 );
> > -    ok(ret==1, "Returned: %d\n", ret);
> > -    ok(WaitForSingleObject(hevent, 0) != WAIT_TIMEOUT, "Asynchronous
message sent instead\n");
> > +    ok((ret == 1 && WaitForSingleObject(hevent, 0) != WAIT_TIMEOUT) ||
> > +       (ret == 0 && WaitForSingleObject(hevent, 1000) == WAIT_TIMEOUT)
/* win10 */,
> > +       "Asynchronous message sent instead of synchronous message or no
message. Returned: %d\n", ret);
> >      PulseEvent(hevent);

> As you say, some of these flag combinations are meaningless.  I suggest
> we just remove them.

Hmm, I generally assume that test cases are there for a reason, but I'm
happy to just remove the six invalid flags tests if there is general
consensus that that's the right thing to do. Does anyone else have an
opinion?

-Alex