Closed
Bug 359002
Opened 18 years ago
Closed 18 years ago
single pixel background image is incorrect color (third line of acid2)
Categories
(Core :: Graphics, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: dbaron, Assigned: vlad)
References
()
Details
(Keywords: regression)
Attachments
(3 files)
638 bytes,
text/html; charset=UTF-8
|
Details | |
5.65 KB,
patch
|
pavlov
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
971 bytes,
patch
|
vlad
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
The third line of the acid2 test regressed between Linux nightlies 2006-10-26-04-trunk and 2006-10-27-04-trunk. It doesn't look particularly easy to simplify a testcase, so it may be easier to figure out by isolating the offending checkin.
Steps to reproduce:
1. load http://www.webstandards.org/files/acid2/test.html#top
Expected results: No aqua. Other than the eyes, the test should be just yellow and black.
Actual results: The 12px high row just above the eyes is aqua instead of yellow.
Possible checkins are:
http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=PhoenixTinderbox&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=&file=&filetype=match&who=&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=explicit&mindate=2006-10-26+04%3A02&maxdate=2006-10-27+04%3A09&cvsroot=%2Fcvsroot
Comment 1•18 years ago
|
||
I don't see any layout changes other than SVG, a focus bug, and some regression tests being added in that range.
I do see a bunch of cairo changes, though none look obviously relevant.
Interestingly, I cannot reproduce the bug over here with Seamonkey builds pulled at MOZ_CO_DATE="Sat Oct 28 00:03:30 CDT 2006" (both cairo and gtk2 GFX)... I _can_ reproduce with a Firefox build pulled at the same time (!).
No clue what's up with that.
Comment 2•18 years ago
|
||
looks ok on mac.
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•18 years ago
|
||
That row has a 1x1 pixel png background, which I handle specially in 357761; it's possible that that part's broken somehow. I'll take a look tomorrow.
Comment 4•18 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #3)
> That row has a 1x1 pixel png background, which I handle specially in 357761;
> it's possible that that part's broken somehow. I'll take a look tomorrow.
>
Looks that way, vlad. Removing the background png url from the css makes it go to red (as expected) instead of aqua.
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•18 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Updated•18 years ago
|
Component: General → GFX: Thebes
QA Contact: general → thebes
Reporter | ||
Updated•18 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → vladimir
Keywords: regression
Summary: third line of acid2 regressed 2006-10-27 → single pixel background image is incorrect color (third line of acid2)
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•18 years ago
|
||
I put a printf in ThebesDrawTile, and mSinglePixelColor is wrong there -- the r component is 0 instead of the b.
Reporter | ||
Comment 7•18 years ago
|
||
gfxImageSurface is (maybe) documented as ARGB. gfxRGBA's constructor is documented as taking ABGR. (Should they really be different?) Yet nsThebesImage::Optimize goes from one to the other without conversion.
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•18 years ago
|
||
(And I did confirm by local backout that bug 357761 was the cause.)
Comment 9•18 years ago
|
||
For what it's worth, it looks like I had somehow failed to build my thebes seamonkey tree, which is why it wasn't showing the bug...
Blocks: 334730
Flags: blocking1.9-
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•18 years ago
|
||
dbaron's analysis was correct; I was passing in ARGB to a constructor that expected ABGR. I tried to make it a little more obvious as to what was going on, to avoid creating this problem in the future.
Attachment #244355 -
Flags: review?(pavlov)
Updated•18 years ago
|
Attachment #244355 -
Flags: review?(pavlov) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•18 years ago
|
||
Fix checked in.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•18 years ago
|
||
Whoops, forgot to read in r/g/b/a for the premultiplied case.
Attachment #244935 -
Flags: review+
Comment 13•18 years ago
|
||
That last checkin isn't likely to be causing the Firefox Mac orange, right? ;)
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•18 years ago
|
||
I sure hope not!
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•