489122 - MOZ_REFLOW_PERF misspelled MOZ_REFLOW_PREF in @top_srcdir@/configure.in

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Firefox Build System :: General, defect)

Description

[Matthew Cline]

MOZ_REFLOW_PERF is twice misspelled MOZ_REFLOW_PREF in @top_srcdir@/configure.in, meaning that reflow performance logging can't be enabled on its own.

Comment 1

[Phil Ringnalda (:philor)]

Easy enough to fix, but I'm not sure whether there's a point in fixing it. The timeline is:

2000-11-30 - bug 61469 added --enable-reflow-perf

2001-03-12 - bug 71514 added includes in nsPresShell.cpp in #ifdef MOZ_REFLOW_PERF_DSP and code in #ifdef MOZ_REFLOW_PERF, and made both things unconditionally defined for debug builds, making --enable-reflow-perf not matter except for non-debug builds - a comment there says rods made sure it built in release builds, but not whether he meant release builds with --enable-reflow-perf, which do not currently build because of the missing include

2001-10-26 - bug 61907 typoed the AC_DEFINE, making --enable-reflow-perf a no-op

So for eight years now, if you built debug you got MOZ_REFLOW_PERF whether you wanted it or not, and if you didn't build debug you didn't get it. The only way I know of to get any output from it is the layout-debug extension, which doesn't build if you aren't building debug (viewer was before my time, so I don't know if it would build in release builds). Deciding that reflow-perf is debug-only would allow for a whole bunch of simplification: drop both defines, the --enable, and the massive variety of things like |#if defined(DEBUG) || (defined(MOZ_REFLOW_PERF_DSP) && defined(MOZ_REFLOW_PERF))| and replace them all with just |#ifdef DEBUG|.

Comment 2

[Phil Ringnalda (:philor)]

Attachment: The make-it-compile approach

This will actually compile, which I always think is a nice touch. No idea if it actually compiles into code that's of any use, though. Alternate just-use-debug patch to follow, for your choosing pleasure.

Comment 3

[Phil Ringnalda (:philor)]

Attachment: The make-it-debug-only approach

Practically speaking, this is really what we've had for eight years now, just made less obscure and more explicit.

Comment 4

[Robert O'Callahan (:roc) (email my personal email if necessary)]

Comment on attachment 375545 [details] [diff] [review]
The make-it-compile approach

This part is a no-brainer. What we should do with it beyond this, I don't know.

Comment 5

[Phil Ringnalda (:philor)]

k, http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/39a58d2e1079 - if someone wants to take the debug-only version, I can always unrot it.