Bug 1828860 Comment 0 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 
There are frequent warnings in our treeherder log files like:

```
[task 2023-04-19T07:39:36.955Z] 07:39:36     INFO - PID 964 | [Child 6348, Main Thread] WARNING: JSWindowActorChild::SendRawMessage (Conduits, ConduitClosed) not sent: !CanSend() || !mManager || !mManager->CanSend(): file /builds/worker/checkouts/gecko/dom/ipc/jsactor/JSWindowActorChild.cpp:57

```

Most likely [they come from here](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/31f5847a4494b3646edabbdd7ea39cb88509afe2/toolkit/components/extensions/ConduitsChild.jsm#135-137). 

I am not familiar with actors in JS, but I assume we can check some equivalent of `CanSend()` before trying to send it? It might also be that [`didDestroy`](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/31f5847a4494b3646edabbdd7ea39cb88509afe2/toolkit/components/extensions/ConduitsChild.jsm#200,202,204) should call `Close` with a flag that does not try to send back something, given we are already destroyed?
Revision 1 by
on 
There are frequent warnings in our treeherder log files like:

```
[task 2023-04-19T07:39:36.955Z] 07:39:36     INFO - PID 964 | [Child 6348, Main Thread] WARNING: JSWindowActorChild::SendRawMessage (Conduits, ConduitClosed) not sent: !CanSend() || !mManager || !mManager->CanSend(): file /builds/worker/checkouts/gecko/dom/ipc/jsactor/JSWindowActorChild.cpp:57

```

Most likely [they come from here](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/31f5847a4494b3646edabbdd7ea39cb88509afe2/toolkit/components/extensions/ConduitsChild.jsm#135-137). 

I am not familiar with actors in JS, but I assume we can check some equivalent of `CanSend()` before trying to send it? ~~It might also be that [`didDestroy`](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/31f5847a4494b3646edabbdd7ea39cb88509afe2/toolkit/components/extensions/ConduitsChild.jsm#200,202,204) should call `Close` with a flag that does not try to send back something, given we are already destroyed?~~ No, that is already the case with `silent`.

Back to Bug 1828860 Comment 0