If you think a bug might affect users in the 57 release, please set the correct tracking and status flags for Release Management.

[FIX]Handle page-break frames after we've sorted out our correct parent

RESOLVED FIXED

Status

()

Core
Layout: Misc Code
RESOLVED FIXED
9 years ago
9 years ago

People

(Reporter: bz, Assigned: bz)

Tracking

Trunk
x86
Mac OS X
Points:
---
Bug Flags:
in-testsuite +

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment, 1 obsolete attachment)

Right now mixing page-break with table pseudos leads us to stick page-break frames all sorts of places where we don't expect them.  Patch coming up fixes the issue.
Created attachment 362967 [details] [diff] [review]
Proposed fix

Without this patch, the crashtest triggers:

###!!! ASSERTION: Table row has a non-cell child.: 'Not Reached', file /Users/bzbarsky/mozilla/css-frameconst/mozilla/layout/tables/nsTableRowFrame.cpp, line 1420
###!!! ASSERTION: yikes, a non-row child: 'Not Reached', file /Users/bzbarsky/mozilla/css-frameconst/mozilla/layout/tables/nsTableRowFrame.cpp, line 814
###!!! ASSERTION: yikes, a non-row child: 'Not Reached', file /Users/bzbarsky/mozilla/css-frameconst/mozilla/layout/tables/nsTableRowGroupFrame.cpp, line 383
###!!! ASSERTION: Non-row-group primary frame list child of an nsTableFrame?  How come?: 'Not Reached', file /Users/bzbarsky/mozilla/css-frameconst/mozilla/layout/tables/nsTableFrame.cpp, line 2780
###!!! ASSERTION: Non-row-group primary frame list child of an nsTableFrame?  How come?: 'Not Reached', file /Users/bzbarsky/mozilla/css-frameconst/mozilla/layout/tables/nsTableFrame.cpp, line 2780
Attachment #362967 - Flags: superreview?(roc)
Attachment #362967 - Flags: review?(roc)
Comment on attachment 362967 [details] [diff] [review]
Proposed fix

+  // XXXbz should we actually allow page-break frames here?

We probably should, but I won't push the point since page-break shouldn't be implemented by generating frames at all.
Attachment #362967 - Flags: superreview?(roc)
Attachment #362967 - Flags: superreview+
Attachment #362967 - Flags: review?(roc)
Attachment #362967 - Flags: review+
Yeah; I was worried in particular about pointing them to native anon content...

I can file a followup bug on that.
Created attachment 364698 [details] [diff] [review]
Same as above, but fixes issue where we were passing the wrong style context to FindXULDisplayData
Attachment #362967 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Pushed http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/159ff2e4c2eb
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 9 years ago
Flags: in-testsuite+
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.