Closed Bug 735943 Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago
Crash @ ns
CSSFrame Constructor::Process Pending Restyles
1.15 KB, text/html
9.40 KB, text/plain
3.28 KB, text/plain
6.56 KB, text/html
4.19 KB, patch
|Details | Diff | Splinter Review|
3.33 KB, patch
|Details | Diff | Splinter Review|
About 50% of the time, this testcase causes a crash in nsCSSFrameConstructor::ProcessPendingRestyles.
Assignee: nobody → matspal
Component: DOM: Core & HTML → Layout
OS: Mac OS X → All
QA Contact: general → layout
Hardware: x86_64 → All
FYI, the document has a strong pointer to the nsSMILAnimationController object, which keeps a raw pointer to it (mDocument). Try results pending: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?usebuildbot=1&tree=Try&rev=0281d2f4f580 Filed bug 735966 on the assertion when running the crash test.
Attachment #606076 - Flags: review?(bzbarsky)
Again, with just this change this time (there's a jsreftest crash in the one above): https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?usebuildbot=1&tree=Try&rev=8316f137ca46
My testcase (reduced from what the fuzzer created) is an insane tangle of setTimeouts. It might be possible to create a more robust regression test ;)
I hit bp-d0df45dc-63db-44d8-a6d8-f76722120315 (popups blocked) and bp-3d521fe3-cc02-44fc-8058-d85972120315 (popups allowed).
Crash Signature: [@ nsCSSFrameConstructor::ProcessPendingRestyles()] [@ nsCSSFrameConstructor::ProcessPendingRestyles] [@ PresShell::FlushPendingNotifications(mozFlushType)]
Summary: Crash [@ nsCSSFrameConstructor::ProcessPendingRestyles] → Crash @ nsCSSFrameConstructor::ProcessPendingRestyles
Hmm, there's a couple of "ASSERTION: This is unsafe! Fix the caller!: 'Error', content/events/src/nsEventDispatcher.cpp, line 558" on the new crash test. https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=10090225&tree=Try&full=1#error0
Comment on attachment 606076 [details] [diff] [review] fix+test Document (probably in the header and at the presshell check for mIsDestroying) that FlushResampleRequests can trigger style flushes, and r=me
Attachment #606076 - Flags: review?(bzbarsky) → review+
This crash fix seems worth taking on branches after baking it for a while...
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
(In reply to Mats Palmgren [:mats] from comment #11) > This crash fix seems worth taking on branches after baking it for a while... Do we know what the regressing bug is or whether this is a pain point for users? If not, this can ride the trains.
I would guess the addition of the FlushResampleRequests() call in http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/d6dbb4231c11 is what caused the regression (bug 547333). The reason I recommend merging this fix to branches is that without it we run script from inside a destroyed pres shell, which I think is unsafe. The fix is very low-risk.
Comment on attachment 606076 [details] [diff] [review] fix+test See comment 14.
Comment on attachment 606076 [details] [diff] [review] fix+test [Triage Comment] Low risk fix, and both Mats and the security team agree that this is something we should fix all the way up to FF12. Please land asap, as we'll go to build with Beta 4 tomorrow (4/3) at 5PM PT. Please make sure to prepare a patch for the ESR branch as well.
The fix applies also to esr10, but without the test since the pref() reftest feature doesn't exist there, afaict.
Attachment #611648 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr10?
Verified fixed in nightly Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120402 Firefox/14.0a1. The testcase pretty reliably crashes my Aurora build.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Comment on attachment 611648 [details] [diff] [review] for esr10 Thanks, please go ahead and land as per https://wiki.mozilla.org/Release_Management/ESR_Landing_Process
Attachment #611648 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr10? → approval-mozilla-esr10+
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.