Bug 1816857 Comment 8 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

Original comment by
on 
(In reply to Alexandre LISSY :gerard-majax from comment #6)
> I'm not sure however looking at https://crash-stats.mozilla.org/report/index/5b3fb790-3584-41b7-83a5-9864a0230304 that `mLaunchPromise = nullptr`, shouldn't we dont see `mozilla::MozPromise<bool, nsresult, 0>::Private::Reject<const nsresult&>(nsresult const&, char const*)` in the stack if it was the case?

I think that there is nothing that would prevent us [from calling `Reject` on a `nullptr` here](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/00ea1649b59d5f427979e2d6ba42be96f62d6e82/ipc/glue/UtilityProcessHost.cpp#346). And yesterday I also looked as this stack's minidump in VS which also showed `mLaunchPromise` to be null when we get there (to be taken with a grain of salt, of course, as minidumps do not contain all the memory, but still).
Revision 1 by
on 
(In reply to Alexandre LISSY :gerard-majax from comment #6)
> I'm not sure however looking at https://crash-stats.mozilla.org/report/index/5b3fb790-3584-41b7-83a5-9864a0230304 that `mLaunchPromise = nullptr`, shouldn't we dont see `mozilla::MozPromise<bool, nsresult, 0>::Private::Reject<const nsresult&>(nsresult const&, char const*)` in the stack if it was the case?

I think that there is nothing that would prevent us [from calling `Reject` on a `nullptr` here](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/00ea1649b59d5f427979e2d6ba42be96f62d6e82/ipc/glue/UtilityProcessHost.cpp#346). And yesterday I also looked at this stack's minidump in VS which also showed `mLaunchPromise` to be null when we get there (to be taken with a grain of salt, of course, as minidumps do not contain all the memory, but still).

Back to Bug 1816857 Comment 8