Bugzilla

(In reply to Agi Sferro | :agi | ni? for questions | ⏰ PST | he/him from comment #1)
> this is for the codereview, but I think we can emit the same event? something like `GeckoView:ChildProcessCrashReport`, and maybe even reuse `ContentCrashHandler.jsm`.

Sounds good. Yes we should be able to use a shared `ChildCrashHandler.jsm`.

> Yeah I think we need a new field, something like `EXTRA_CRASH_BACKGROUND` perhaps? because Gecko can just restart the GPU process and everything will keep working as usual, right? I think all Fenix would want to do is display a notification that a background process crashed (or perhaps not even that)

Yes, from the user's perspective they'll usually see a brief flicker and then everything will resume as usual. A new `background` field sounds good. I'll update the existing Parent and Content crash tests to expect `background == false`, and add a GPU crash test which expects `fatal == false && background == true`.

I'll also file a bug on Fenix' GitHub to let them know of the plans.

(In reply to Agi Sferro | :agi | ni? for questions | ⏰ PST | he/him from comment #1)
> this is for the codereview, but I think we can emit the same event? something like `GeckoView:ChildProcessCrashReport`, and maybe even reuse `ContentCrashHandler.jsm`.

Sounds good. Yes we should be able to use a shared `ChildCrashHandler.jsm`.

> Yeah I think we need a new field, something like `EXTRA_CRASH_BACKGROUND` perhaps? because Gecko can just restart the GPU process and everything will keep working as usual, right? I think all Fenix would want to do is display a notification that a background process crashed (or perhaps not even that)

Yes, from the user's perspective they'll usually see a brief flicker and then everything will resume as usual. A new `background` field sounds good. I'll update the existing Parent and Content crash tests to expect `background == false`, and add a GPU crash test which expects `fatal == false && background == true`.