Jagged outline on a CSS Codepen demo (https://codepen.io/alvaromontoro/pen/YzOjOWQ )
Categories
(Core :: Graphics: WebRender, defect, P3)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: mayankleoboy1, Unassigned)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug, )
Details
Attachments
(4 files)
Go to https://codepen.io/alvaromontoro/pen/YzOjOWQ
Observe that the joint of the right hand has a permanent jagged line/outline.
ER: Not so
I have observed this bug before, but assumed that it would be fixed bug 1850869/bug 1671784 and co.
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•1 year ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•1 year ago
|
||
I guess there are two types of jagged outlines here:
- The one encircled in red ink - This jaggedness is consistent while the arm moves. So probably more important and something that would have been fixed by the recent clip-mask fixes
- The two encircled in blue ink - They looks to be more of snapping?
mozregression isn't perfect as when those lines didn't appear, the tail didn't appear at certain zoom levels.
Last good build: 2020-12-12
First bad build: 2020-12-12
build_url: https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/2020/12/2020-12-12-21-29-13-mozilla-central/firefox-85.0a1.en-US.win64.zip
changeset: 8d6972b0b89b1303dbcfb566e16b1144303af83e
pushlog_url: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=8d6972b0b89b1303dbcfb566e16b1144303af83e&tochange=8c4e9bba69eabce48600c6872cf3032229591fa3
(In reply to Blake from comment #3)
mozregression isn't perfect as when those lines didn't appear, the tail didn't appear at certain zoom levels.
Last good build: 2020-12-12
First bad build: 2020-12-12
build_url: https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/2020/12/2020-12-12-21-29-13-mozilla-central/firefox-85.0a1.en-US.win64.zip
changeset: 8d6972b0b89b1303dbcfb566e16b1144303af83e
pushlog_url: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=8d6972b0b89b1303dbcfb566e16b1144303af83e&tochange=8c4e9bba69eabce48600c6872cf3032229591fa3
First bad build was the 13th with is this changelog: pushlog_url: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=1130661c79c222fb1acd29b7ec5dc5202cdd0d2d&tochange=6567bdeb3c1e97a75f12fd72d92a6fb4a2cfcc91
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•1 year ago
|
||
(In reply to Blake from comment #4)
(In reply to Blake from comment #3)
mozregression isn't perfect as when those lines didn't appear, the tail didn't appear at certain zoom levels.
Last good build: 2020-12-12
First bad build: 2020-12-12
build_url: https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/2020/12/2020-12-12-21-29-13-mozilla-central/firefox-85.0a1.en-US.win64.zip
changeset: 8d6972b0b89b1303dbcfb566e16b1144303af83e
pushlog_url: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=8d6972b0b89b1303dbcfb566e16b1144303af83e&tochange=8c4e9bba69eabce48600c6872cf3032229591fa3First bad build was the 13th with is this changelog: pushlog_url: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=1130661c79c222fb1acd29b7ec5dc5202cdd0d2d&tochange=6567bdeb3c1e97a75f12fd72d92a6fb4a2cfcc91
This is probably just bug 1681921, which would enable Webrender on your machine (in the form of sw-wr).
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•1 year ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 7•1 year ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•1 year ago
|
||
I am confused here.
On the original testcase, Firefox is buggy and Chrome is good.
I tried to reduce the testcases, and i ended up with 2 reduced testcases - One is good on both browsers, the other is bad on both browsers.
Comment 9•1 year ago
|
||
The problem here is that a rotated rectangle should be drawn anti-aliased whereas if it is axis-aligned it should be drawn without AA (snapped to the pixel grid). If the browser decides to rasterize the rectangles rotated directly, then the anti-aliasing at its border causes a bit of transparency through which we can see a bit of the black rectangle under it. If the browser decides to rasterize the rectangle into a layer and then rotate it, then it is first drawn without AA and the black rectangle does not show through it.
With the simpler test case, chrome took a different layerization decision.
I don't think that the correct behavior is well specified here.
Updated•6 months ago
|
Description
•