Crash in [@ nsTreeBodyFrame::SetFocused]
Categories
(Core :: XUL, defect)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: aryx, Assigned: emilio)
References
Details
(Keywords: crash, regression)
Crash Data
Attachments
(1 file)
48 bytes,
text/x-phabricator-request
|
RyanVM
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
diannaS
:
approval-mozilla-release+
|
Details | Review |
156 crashes from 114 installations of Firefox 108.0 and 108.0.1
Emilio: Any idea what changed? There hadd been isolated crash reports for previous versions.
Crash report: https://crash-stats.mozilla.org/report/index/c1c32539-034c-4502-8ee0-167620221219
Reason: EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION_READ
Top 10 frames of crashing thread:
0 xul.dll nsTreeBodyFrame::SetFocused layout/xul/tree/nsTreeBodyFrame.cpp:447
1 xul.dll mozilla::dom::XULTreeElement_Binding::set_focused dom/bindings/XULTreeElementBinding.cpp:338
2 xul.dll mozilla::dom::binding_detail::GenericSetter<mozilla::dom::binding_detail::NormalThisPolicy> dom/bindings/BindingUtils.cpp:3235
3 xul.dll CallJSNative js/src/vm/Interpreter.cpp:459
3 xul.dll js::InternalCallOrConstruct js/src/vm/Interpreter.cpp:547
3 xul.dll InternalCall js/src/vm/Interpreter.cpp:614
3 xul.dll js::Call js/src/vm/Interpreter.cpp:646
3 xul.dll js::CallSetter js/src/vm/Interpreter.cpp:790
4 xul.dll SetExistingProperty js/src/vm/NativeObject.cpp:2549
4 xul.dll js::NativeSetProperty<1> js/src/vm/NativeObject.cpp:2625
![]() |
Reporter | |
Updated•2 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•2 years ago
|
||
User comments seem helpful here:
Tried to clear history -regular blink was grayed out, he highlighted all history in Manage History when Firefox crashed.
when i want to delete history using the 'DEL' key mozilla crashes
etc. So I assume this is in the history window which is where there's a XUL tree.
However I don't quite understand how this line can crash on its own: https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-release/annotate/eebe28618896b353a76ac9c220fd4b96334cd73d/layout/xul/tree/nsTreeBodyFrame.cpp#l447
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•2 years ago
|
||
I couldn't repro either on release or nightly, on Linux...
opend-up hitory. selected all and hit delete. The browser crashaed like a house of cards.
I can't repro any of this, and we haven't touched trees nor that window in particular (that still uses legacy xul layout), so hard to say which change is responsible...
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•2 years ago
|
||
Olli / Nika, do you by any chance see anything suspicious in the line linked in comment 1?
GetSelection can run script, in theory, and destroy this
(that really sucks). But IIUC that should be calling this which seems fairly harmless... Maybe some microtask or something could run in between and mess up the state?
Updated•2 years ago
|
Comment 4•2 years ago
|
||
Microtasks shouldn't run there, unless something triggers something which either spins event loop or calls to webidl callbacks. GC/CC could trigger some notification elsewhere which runs those or runs something else.
At least mView should assigned to a local variable.
We've had some similar looking crashes quite some time
https://crash-stats.mozilla.org/report/index/bc4b710b-92f0-45d5-a2a0-00a990221117
The relevant code is old. From 2001, bug 71139?
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•2 years ago
|
||
Not a complete fix (there are some callers from reflow which are not
particularly great), but this should make the code more robust.
Updated•2 years ago
|
Updated•2 years ago
|
Comment 7•2 years ago
|
||
Interesting that these crashes only appear to have started after v108 went to late beta. Suggests at least that we might not be able to see any effect from this patch until 109.0b7 ships next week (assuming we uplift in the mean time).
Comment 8•2 years ago
|
||
Seems like :smaug and :emilio have already figured it out, so clearing the ni?
Comment 9•2 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Comment 10•2 years ago
|
||
The patch landed in nightly and beta is affected.
:emilio, is this bug important enough to require an uplift?
- If yes, please nominate the patch for beta approval.
- If no, please set
status-firefox109
towontfix
.
For more information, please visit auto_nag documentation.
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•2 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9308962 [details]
Bug 1806408 - Try to make nsTreeBodyFrame code more robust. r=smaug
Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
- User impact if declined: Tentative fix for high-volume crash.
- Is this code covered by automated tests?: Yes
- Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: No
- Needs manual test from QE?: No
- If yes, steps to reproduce:
- List of other uplifts needed: none
- Risk to taking this patch: Low
- Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): Relatively simple fix to ancient code.
- String changes made/needed: none
- Is Android affected?: No
Comment 12•2 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9308962 [details]
Bug 1806408 - Try to make nsTreeBodyFrame code more robust. r=smaug
Approved for 109.0b5. As noted in comment 7, however, we may not be able to see if this patch is helping until after b7 ships next week.
Comment 13•2 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•2 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9308962 [details]
Bug 1806408 - Try to make nsTreeBodyFrame code more robust. r=smaug
Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
- User impact if declined: Low risk tentative crash fix.
- Is this code covered by automated tests?: No
- Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: No
- Needs manual test from QE?: No
- If yes, steps to reproduce:
- List of other uplifts needed: none
- Risk to taking this patch: Low
- Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): Rather trivial patch to avoid a set of crashes in ancient code.
- String changes made/needed: none
- Is Android affected?: No
Comment 15•2 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9308962 [details]
Bug 1806408 - Try to make nsTreeBodyFrame code more robust. r=smaug
Approved for 108.0.2
Comment 16•2 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
Updated•2 years ago
|
Description
•