Closed
Bug 1160642
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
add reftest-async-zoom to apply an async zoom before taking snapshot
Categories
(Testing :: Reftest, defect)
Testing
Reftest
Tracking
(firefox41 fixed)
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla41
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox41 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: tnikkel, Assigned: tnikkel)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 3 obsolete files)
20.66 KB,
patch
|
dbaron
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
reftest-async-zoom is like reftest-async-scroll-x/y except for zoom. It is a handy addition to a sadly under-tested part of gecko: async panning/zooming.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•9 years ago
|
||
Need at least an iid bump and some annotations to the reftest-sanity reftests that test the new feature to make them only run when we have an async pan zoom controller to do the requested zoom.
Comment 2•9 years ago
|
||
So, do we also need something for testing stationary APZ-style zoom, if reftest-zoom is full page Desktop-style zoom?
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Markus Stange [:mstange] from comment #2) > So, do we also need something for testing stationary APZ-style zoom, if > reftest-zoom is full page Desktop-style zoom? Yes, we do. But that will have to be another bug.
Comment 5•9 years ago
|
||
I made the changes from comment 1 in my local version
Attachment #8600467 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
I wrote these tests which use reftest-async-zoom.
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8607682 [details] [diff] [review] add scrollbar tests using the new feature A patch on bug 1151617 does this better. marking obsolete.
Attachment #8607682 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Flags: needinfo?(tnikkel)
Attachment #8607605 -
Flags: review?(bugmail.mozilla)
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8607605 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v2 dbaron, do you want to review/okay adding this reftest feature?
Attachment #8607605 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8607605 -
Flags: review?(bugmail.mozilla) → review+
Comment 9•9 years ago
|
||
Updated this patch to address botond's comment at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1151617#c21 - it's just a minor change to AsyncPanZoomController.cpp, the rest of the patch is unchanged. My r+ stands.
Attachment #8607605 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8607605 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #8608697 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Comment on attachment 8608697 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v3 Not sure which parts I'm being asked to review, so I'll just review the reftest bits. >+Testing Async Zooming: reftest-async-zoom="<float>" >+========================================================= >+ >+When the "reftest-async-zoom" attribute is present on the root element then at >+the end of the test take the snapshot with the given async zoom on top of any >+existing zoom. Content is not re-rendered at the new zoom level. This >+corresponds to the mobile style "pinch zoom" style of zoom. This is unsupported >+in many configurations. Maybe mention the asyncZoom in the condition sandbox here? >+ var zoom = attrOrDefault(contentRootElement, "reftest-async-zoom", 0); >+ if (zoom != 0) { Seems like it would make more sense for both of these 0s to be 1s. r=dbaron
Attachment #8608697 -
Flags: review?(dbaron) → review+
Comment 12•9 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/9b5127b7f759
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
status-firefox41:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla41
One other thought about this patch -- does anything need to happen to reset this after the test finishes so that things behave normally for the next test?
Flags: needinfo?(bugmail.mozilla)
Comment 14•9 years ago
|
||
I don't think so, because the APZC that ends up with the reftest-asyc-zoom should get destroyed at the end of the test, and the next test will create a new set of APZCs without the extra zoom.
Flags: needinfo?(bugmail.mozilla)
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•