Enable async event dispatching (remote.events.async.enabled) by default
Categories
(Remote Protocol :: Agent, task, P2)
Tracking
(firefox135 fixed)
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox135 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: whimboo, Assigned: whimboo)
References
(Blocks 2 open bugs, Regressed 1 open bug)
Details
(Whiteboard: [webdriver:m14][wptsync upstream][webdriver:relnote])
Attachments
(3 files, 1 obsolete file)
At a certain point when all events can be dispatched as widget (async) events we should consider turning the preference remote.events.async.enabled
on by default. Maybe this should happen for Nightly builds first.
Assignee | ||
Updated•4 months ago
|
Assignee | ||
Updated•4 months ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•3 months ago
|
||
(In reply to Henrik Skupin [:whimboo][⌚️UTC+2] from comment #0)
At a certain point when all events can be dispatched as widget (async) events we should consider turning the preference
remote.events.async.enabled
on by default. Maybe this should happen for Nightly builds first.
We actually do not need the widget events to enable the first batch of changes for processing actions in the parent process. For widget events I'm going to add additional preferences for each input type, which will depend on the above preference's value.
Turning on the feature by default requires all known issues to be fixed. I'm certain that we can enable it for the next Firefox 135 train. As such lets move this bug into the M14 milestone.
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•3 months ago
|
||
Before enabling the feature we should do some quick performance checks in how much the extra IPC communication delays the processing of the action chain, but not in that detail as initially assumed via bug 1904859.
Updated•3 months ago
|
Comment 3•3 months ago
|
||
Need to decide what to do for the job.
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•3 months ago
|
||
(In reply to Julian Descottes [:jdescottes] from comment #3)
Need to decide what to do for the job.
Maybe we can leave the async Wd jobs untouched for a couple of days until we have the first widget event for wheel scrolling implemented. Then we could use this job to have these extra preferences (like remote.events.async.wheel.enabled
) enabled.
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•3 months ago
|
||
Over the last days since Saturday last week I was not able to find any test failure with the async code enabled that is related to the list of failures in the dependency list. If it stays that way we may consider to push a patch for this bug already next week when the version bump to 135 is done.
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•3 months ago
|
||
Updated•3 months ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•3 months ago
|
||
I'm going to land the update for the test expectations but the rest will need to be followed-up by next week. I'm still seeing at least one issue for Marionette integration tests.
Comment 9•3 months ago
|
||
bugherder |
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•3 months ago
|
||
We discussed this today and agreed on that for now we will keep the async tests active. Soon I will start on the first wheel scroll events that will be send as widget events and we need special test scenarios in CI again. We are going to re-use that test job for it by maybe specifying a specific tag or by passing specific folders only for testing.
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•3 months ago
|
||
(In reply to Henrik Skupin [:whimboo][⌚️UTC+2] from comment #10)
We discussed this today and agreed on that for now we will keep the async tests active. Soon I will start on the first wheel scroll events that will be send as widget events and we need special test scenarios in CI again. We are going to re-use that test job for it by maybe specifying a specific tag or by passing specific folders only for testing.
It would make sense to not run those tests by default for the time being but have them available just for try builds. As discussed with Julian I'll make that change and then we can figure out how to continue using these jobs when the first widget event is about to land.
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•3 months ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•3 months ago
|
||
Comment 14•3 months ago
|
||
Comment 16•3 months ago
|
||
Backed out for causing wpt failures @input-events-get-target-ranges-joining-dl-elements.tentative.html.
- Backout link
- Push with failures
- Failure Log
———————————————————————————————————— - Push with failures tier 2 wpt failures @input-events-spin-button-click-on-number-input-delete-document.html.
- Failure Log
Assignee | ||
Comment 18•3 months ago
|
||
The problem with the test input-events-spin-button-click-on-number-input-delete-document.html
is that an action actually closes the frame we want to dispatch another action to. I filed bug 1935324 to get this corrected.
For the failure in input-events-get-target-ranges-joining-dl-elements.tentative.html
it's still unclear to me what is causing it. As it looks like only the GeckoView Lite package is affected. I've pushed a try build with trace logs enabled to see more details of what's going on given that I cannot run this kind of build locally on my M1 MacBook:
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/jobs?repo=try&revision=653f1f2c9c456fe709167d812e34138395b9d0a4
Assignee | ||
Comment 19•3 months ago
|
||
The failure in input-events-get-target-ranges-joining-dl-elements.tentative.html
doesn't happen anymore in my try build after I rebased on latest mozilla-central. Maybe it was a side-effect. I would try landing it again with the other test marked as expected fail.
Comment 20•3 months ago
|
||
Comment 21•3 months ago
|
||
Backed out for causing wpt failures
Backout link: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/a47beb271989b0d3835f38d0392a2a678467adbe
Comment 23•3 months ago
|
||
Comment 24•3 months ago
|
||
Backed out for causing wpt failures @input-events-get-target-ranges-joining-dl-elements.tentative.html.
Assignee | ||
Comment 26•3 months ago
|
||
I pushed a new try build with all the tests in that file set to multiple statuses (fail, timeout, notrun) on Android:
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/jobs?repo=try&revision=655736ade6161b3db34cde3865c05b3b535901eb
Assignee | ||
Comment 27•3 months ago
|
||
Updated•3 months ago
|
Comment 28•2 months ago
|
||
Comment 29•2 months ago
|
||
bugherder |
Assignee | ||
Updated•2 months ago
|
Assignee | ||
Updated•1 month ago
|
Description
•