Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 50 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upProperly handle stacking context collection for truncated fragments #18510
Conversation
highfive
commented
Sep 14, 2017
|
Heads up! This PR modifies the following files:
|
|
I wonder how many similar bugs did |
|
@bors-servo r=emilio |
|
|
mrobinson
force-pushed the
mrobinson:truncated-fragment-stacking-context-collection
branch
from
98d70ea
to
4262723
|
@bors-servo r=emilio |
|
|
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 15, 2017
…collection, r=emilio Properly handle stacking context collection for truncated fragments Before we did not properly descend intro truncated fragments when collecting stacking contexts. This change makes sure that we descend properly Fixes #18254. Fixes #17072. <!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: --> --- <!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `__` with appropriate data: --> - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [x] These changes fix #18254, #17072 (github issue number if applicable). <!-- Either: --> - [x] There are tests for these changes OR - [ ] These changes do not require tests because _____ <!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.--> <!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. --> <!-- Reviewable:start --> --- This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/18510) <!-- Reviewable:end -->
|
|
mrobinson
force-pushed the
mrobinson:truncated-fragment-stacking-context-collection
branch
from
4262723
to
73c8947
|
I rebased this properly and will send it back to bors. |
|
@bors-servo r=emilio |
|
|
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 15, 2017
…collection, r=emilio Properly handle stacking context collection for truncated fragments Before we did not properly descend intro truncated fragments when collecting stacking contexts. This change makes sure that we descend properly Fixes #18254. Fixes #17072. <!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: --> --- <!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `__` with appropriate data: --> - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [x] These changes fix #18254, #17072 (github issue number if applicable). <!-- Either: --> - [x] There are tests for these changes OR - [ ] These changes do not require tests because _____ <!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.--> <!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. --> <!-- Reviewable:start --> --- This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/18510) <!-- Reviewable:end -->
|
|
|
@bors-servo retry
|
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 16, 2017
…collection, r=emilio Properly handle stacking context collection for truncated fragments Before we did not properly descend intro truncated fragments when collecting stacking contexts. This change makes sure that we descend properly Fixes #18254. Fixes #17072. <!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: --> --- <!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `__` with appropriate data: --> - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [x] These changes fix #18254, #17072 (github issue number if applicable). <!-- Either: --> - [x] There are tests for these changes OR - [ ] These changes do not require tests because _____ <!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.--> <!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. --> <!-- Reviewable:start --> --- This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/18510) <!-- Reviewable:end -->
|
|
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 6, 2019
Fix "Tried to use SpatialId before it was defined" layout panic In the case where an element uses `text-overflow: ellipsis` and causes overflow, we create a TruncatedFragment that wraps the original overflowing fragment. When collecting stacking contexts for the truncated fragment, #18510 addressed the case where the wrapped fragment wouldn't be processed, but neglected the case where that fragment ends up creating a new stacking context. When that happens, the TruncatedFragment would be stuck with the updated scrolling/clipping information based on the new stacking context, but it would be a child of the parent stacking context. Since the new scrolling/clipping nodes do not exist in the display list until the new stacking context display item is created, this led to the observed panic. --- - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [x] These changes fix #24895 and #19281 and #22826. - [x] There are tests for these changes
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 6, 2019
Fix "Tried to use SpatialId before it was defined" layout panic In the case where an element uses `text-overflow: ellipsis` and causes overflow, we create a TruncatedFragment that wraps the original overflowing fragment. When collecting stacking contexts for the truncated fragment, #18510 addressed the case where the wrapped fragment wouldn't be processed, but neglected the case where that fragment ends up creating a new stacking context. When that happens, the TruncatedFragment would be stuck with the updated scrolling/clipping information based on the new stacking context, but it would be a child of the parent stacking context. Since the new scrolling/clipping nodes do not exist in the display list until the new stacking context display item is created, this led to the observed panic. --- - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [x] These changes fix #24895 and #19281 and #22826. - [x] There are tests for these changes
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 9, 2019
Fix "Tried to use SpatialId before it was defined" layout panic In the case where an element uses `text-overflow: ellipsis` and causes overflow, we create a TruncatedFragment that wraps the original overflowing fragment. When collecting stacking contexts for the truncated fragment, #18510 addressed the case where the wrapped fragment wouldn't be processed, but neglected the case where that fragment ends up creating a new stacking context. When that happens, the TruncatedFragment would be stuck with the updated scrolling/clipping information based on the new stacking context, but it would be a child of the parent stacking context. Since the new scrolling/clipping nodes do not exist in the display list until the new stacking context display item is created, this led to the observed panic. --- - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [x] These changes fix #24895 and fix #19281 and fix #22826. - [x] There are tests for these changes
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 9, 2019
Fix "Tried to use SpatialId before it was defined" layout panic In the case where an element uses `text-overflow: ellipsis` and causes overflow, we create a TruncatedFragment that wraps the original overflowing fragment. When collecting stacking contexts for the truncated fragment, #18510 addressed the case where the wrapped fragment wouldn't be processed, but neglected the case where that fragment ends up creating a new stacking context. When that happens, the TruncatedFragment would be stuck with the updated scrolling/clipping information based on the new stacking context, but it would be a child of the parent stacking context. Since the new scrolling/clipping nodes do not exist in the display list until the new stacking context display item is created, this led to the observed panic. --- - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [x] These changes fix #24895 and fix #19281 and fix #22826. - [x] There are tests for these changes
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
mrobinson commentedSep 14, 2017
•
edited
Before we did not properly descend intro truncated fragments when
collecting stacking contexts. This change makes sure that we descend
properly
Fixes #18254.
Fixes #17072.
./mach build -ddoes not report any errors./mach test-tidydoes not report any errorsThis change is