Closed
Bug 1125378
Opened 11 years ago
Closed 11 years ago
Flag in remote-troubleshooting indicating e10s status
Categories
(Firefox :: General, defect)
Firefox
General
Tracking
()
| Tracking | Status | |
|---|---|---|
| e10s | + | --- |
People
(Reporter: cww, Assigned: Gijs)
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
|
3.37 KB,
patch
|
Gavin
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
While we wait for bug 1091944 to resolve, we'd like to have some indicator of the e10s status of the user in the remote-troubleshooting packet. This way, we can quickly determine if the user's feedback in Input (or problem in Support) is caused by e10s.
Comment 1•11 years ago
|
||
We should add a boolean flag to the payload reflecting Services.appinfo.browserTabsRemoteAutostart.
Points: --- → 2
Flags: qe-verify+
Flags: firefox-backlog+
OS: Mac OS X → All
Hardware: x86 → All
Version: 35 Branch → unspecified
Updated•11 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → gijskruitbosch+bugs
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Iteration: --- → 38.2 - 9 Feb
Updated•11 years ago
|
tracking-e10s:
--- → +
| Assignee | ||
Comment 2•11 years ago
|
||
Why is "numRemoteWindows" vs. "numTotalWindows" not good enough?
Flags: needinfo?(cww)
Comment 3•11 years ago
|
||
That doesn't reveal whether e10s is "enabled" or not, on a default basis - we want to expose Services.appinfo.browserTabsRemoteAutostart directly.
Worth considering how this value is interpreted, though, given the presence of "new e10s/non-e10s window".
Flags: needinfo?(cww)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 4•11 years ago
|
||
(In reply to :Gavin Sharp [email: gavin@gavinsharp.com] from comment #3)
> That doesn't reveal whether e10s is "enabled" or not, on a default basis -
> we want to expose Services.appinfo.browserTabsRemoteAutostart directly.
Right, but...
> Worth considering how this value is interpreted, though, given the presence
> of "new e10s/non-e10s window".
Indeed. Seems like it's more useful to know how many windows are actually using e10s or not, but if we're sure we want the other info, it's not hard to implement. Will try to have a patch in a bit.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 5•11 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8555939 -
Flags: review?(gavin.sharp)
Updated•11 years ago
|
Attachment #8555939 -
Flags: review?(gavin.sharp) → review+
| Assignee | ||
Comment 6•11 years ago
|
||
| Assignee | ||
Comment 7•11 years ago
|
||
Annnnd some bustage followup. I did wonder why there wasn't a test in toolkit for this. :-\
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/65f735ba947e
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/9c7ebf496752
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/65f735ba947e
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 38
Comment 9•11 years ago
|
||
This seems to be covered automatically so setting qe-verify-. Please set back if any manual testing is needed.
Flags: qe-verify+ → qe-verify-
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•