1346440 - [e10s] Background or text color of options in drop-down defined by web page are not respected (sometimes)

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: Layout: Form Controls, defect)

Description

[684sigma]

I have a problem with Firefox Beta 52. It doesn't happen on Firefox ESR 45.
Sometimes background or text color of options in drop-down defined by web page are not respected.
It happens unpredictably, however, I noticed one specific scenario when it happens

1. Open this url (text between quotes is url): "data:text/html,<style>option{background-color:black!important;color:white!important;}</style><select><option>Bob</option><option>Alice</option></select>"
2. Click on text "Bob" on the page

Result: options have white background, black text color
Expected: black background, white text color

I found this bug on a site, but was able to replicate is locally, so I don't have to tell you the site.

Comment 1

[YF (Yang)]

Although it's like a duplicate of bug 910022, but I see an unusual paint in 55.0a1 (2017-03-10) (32-bit) with e10s on. Feel free to update the summary.

Comment 2

[YF (Yang)]

Attachment: unusual paint in 55.0a1 (2017-03-10) (32-bit) with e10s on

Comment 3

[Loic]

Yes, styling < select> broken with e10s is bug 910022 (which is only fixed in 54+). But, there is still a remaining issue with unselected options staying invisible with black background in the dropdown list.

Comment 4

[Jared Wein [:jaws] (please needinfo? me)]

[Tracking Requested - why for this release]: visible UI regression in content related to bug 910022

Comment 5

[Jared Wein [:jaws] (please needinfo? me)]

Attachment: Bug 1346440 - Force the user-agent styles to apply when sampling the colors.

Styles defined by the pages were getting applied to the dummy option and select, causing the wrong colors to be reported as the user-agent defaults.

Review commit: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/119760/diff/#index_header
See other reviews: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/119760/

Comment 6

[Liz Henry (:lizzard) (relman/hg->git project)]

Sticking a 53 tracking flag on this as well in case we end up uplifting this and stuff from bug 910022 to 53 beta.

Comment 7

[Jared Wein [:jaws] (please needinfo? me)]

Comment on attachment 8846760 [details]
Bug 1346440 - Force the user-agent styles to apply when sampling the colors.

Review request updated; see interdiff: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/119760/diff/1-2/

Comment 8

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

Comment on attachment 8846760 [details]
Bug 1346440 - Force the user-agent styles to apply when sampling the colors.

https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/119760/#review122578

Comment 9

[Pulsebot]

Pushed by [e-mail]:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/2801d6d63979
Force the user-agent styles to apply when sampling the colors. r=mossop

Comment 10

[Carsten Book [:Tomcat]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2801d6d63979

Comment 11

[Jared Wein [:jaws] (please needinfo? me)]

Comment on attachment 8846760 [details]
Bug 1346440 - Force the user-agent styles to apply when sampling the colors.

Approval Request Comment
[Feature/Bug causing the regression]: regression from bug 910022
[User impact if declined]: some select menus may not show the text and background color as the same and thus unreadable
[Is this code covered by automated tests?]: yes
[Has the fix been verified in Nightly?]: no
[Needs manual test from QE? If yes, steps to reproduce]: no
[List of other uplifts needed for the feature/fix]: none
[Is the change risky?]: no
[Why is the change risky/not risky?]: contained fix to the <select> menus when custom colors are set by the page
[String changes made/needed]: none

Comment 12

[Gerry Chang [:gchang]]

Comment on attachment 8846760 [details]
Bug 1346440 - Force the user-agent styles to apply when sampling the colors.

Fix an UI regression related to select menus. Aurora54+.

Comment 13

[Carsten Book [:Tomcat]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/833b6e00fb07

Comment 14

[Liz Henry (:lizzard) (relman/hg->git project)]

jaws, do you want to uplift this and the work from bug 910022 to beta as well ? Worth the risk?

Comment 15

[Jared Wein [:jaws] (please needinfo? me)]

(In reply to Liz Henry (:lizzard) (needinfo? me) from comment #14)
> jaws, do you want to uplift this and the work from bug 910022 to beta as
> well ? Worth the risk?

We're still getting new bugs filed against the feature every couple days so I'd hold off at this point. blinky, you've been amazing at finding bugs. Has it been getting harder to find new bugs with the feature?

Comment 16

[blinky]

(In reply to Jared Wein [:jaws] (please needinfo? me) from comment #15)
> Has it been getting harder to find new bugs with the feature?

It has gotten harder to find new bugs.

Comment 17

[Jared Wein [:jaws] (please needinfo? me)]

(In reply to Liz Henry (:lizzard) (needinfo? me) from comment #14)
> jaws, do you want to uplift this and the work from bug 910022 to beta as
> well ? Worth the risk?

Over the weekend blinky found a couple more bugs. Though it has gotten harder to find new bugs, the amount of follow-up from bug 910022 and the rate at which new bugs are being found is concerning regarding uplift to 53. At this point I'm confident that we should not uplift to 53.

Comment 18

[Julien Cristau [:jcristau]]

setting 53 back to unaffected based on comment 17, since we won't be uplifting 910022.