1568028 - [wfh] about:support doesn't report/show separate socket process in "Remote Processes" section

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(Core :: Networking, defect, P2)

Description

[Virtual_ManPL [:Virtual] 🇵🇱 - (please needinfo? me - so I will see your comment/reply/question/etc.)]

Bug #1513057 implanted separate socket process controlled by "network.process.enabled" preference in about:config, and bug #1555792 set "network.process.enabled" preference by default to "true", as well as "media.peerconnection.mtransport_process" for running media transport in separate process.

STR:

1. Open about:support
   and see that it doesn't report/show separate socket process in "Remote Processes" section.

Comment 1

[Byron Campen [:bwc]]

I don't see RDD, or GPU, or GMP in there either.

Comment 2

[Virtual_ManPL [:Virtual] 🇵🇱 - (please needinfo? me - so I will see your comment/reply/question/etc.)]

In my case, I have GPU process included in "Remote Processes" section in about:support.

This is how it looks on my end:

Remote Processes

Type: Web Content
Count: 8 / 8

Type: Privileged About
Count: 1

Type: Extension
Count: 1

Type: GPU
Count: 1

Comment 3

[Michal Novotny [:michal]]

Kershaw, can you please have a look at it?

Comment 4

[Byron Campen [:bwc]]

This might be helpful for QA; they need to be able to verify whether the socket process is active or not.

Comment 5

[Daniel Bodea [:danibodea]]

This issue is also present on Mac OS, along with Windows 7.
It is not reproducing in Windows 10 and Ubuntu 18.

Comment 6

[Virtual_ManPL [:Virtual] 🇵🇱 - (please needinfo? me - so I will see your comment/reply/question/etc.)]

(In reply to Bodea Daniel [:danibodea] from comment #5)

This issue is also present on Mac OS, along with Windows 7.
It is not reproducing in Windows 10 and Ubuntu 18.

Are you sure that Windows 10 and Ubuntu 18 shows socket process as separate process under "Remote Processes" section in about:support?

Comment 7

[Daniel Bodea [:danibodea]]

I assumed that the GPU is what I should see under Remote Processes, considering that that's the difference I saw between these OSes. Please clarify what I should see when to confirm a separate process is displayed on about:support. Thank you.

Comment 8

[Virtual_ManPL [:Virtual] 🇵🇱 - (please needinfo? me - so I will see your comment/reply/question/etc.)]

You should see "Socket" process, but you won't see it, as it not yet implanted there to see.

Comment 9

[Kershaw Chang [:kershaw]]

Attachment: Bug 1568028 - Show socket process in about:support

Comment 10

[Daniel Bodea [:danibodea]]

Then it reproduces on all OS types. Thank you.

Comment 11

[Pulsebot]

Pushed by [e-mail]:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/7ca34206d5cb
Show socket process in about:support r=fluent-reviewers,mconley

Comment 12

[Andrei Ciure[:aciure]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/7ca34206d5cb

Comment 13

[Daniel Bodea [:danibodea]]

Attachment: socket process in about support.png

The "Socket" appears with value 1 in about:support, bug when attempting to disable it by adding the "MOZ_DISABLE_SOCKET_PROCESS_SANDBOX" with value 1 to System variables, the "Socket" is still displayed with value 1 in about:support.
Am I disabling it correctly?

How do I disable the socket process in Linux and Mac?
Thanks.

Comment 14

[Kershaw Chang [:kershaw]]

(In reply to Bodea Daniel [:danibodea] from comment #13)

Created attachment 9138713 [details]
socket process in about support.png

The "Socket" appears with value 1 in about:support, bug when attempting to disable it by adding the "MOZ_DISABLE_SOCKET_PROCESS_SANDBOX" with value 1 to System variables, the "Socket" is still displayed with value 1 in about:support.
Am I disabling it correctly?

How do I disable the socket process in Linux and Mac?
Thanks.

MOZ_DISABLE_SOCKET_PROCESS_SANDBOX is for disabling the sandboxing of socket process. To disable the socket process, just set the pref network.process.enabled to false.

Comment 15

[Virtual_ManPL [:Virtual] 🇵🇱 - (please needinfo? me - so I will see your comment/reply/question/etc.)]

I'm confirming that bug is fixed, starting in Mozilla Firefox Nightly 77.0a1 (2020-04-06), so I'm marking this bug as VERIFIED.
Thank you very much! \o/