Persona is no longer an option for authentication on BMO. For more details see Persona Deprecated.
Last Comment Bug 775211 - Custom menu is a tad slower to expand on initial invoke in Jellybean (Android 4.1)
: Custom menu is a tad slower to expand on initial invoke in Jellybean (Android...
Product: Firefox for Android
Classification: Client Software
Component: General (show other bugs)
: 17 Branch
: ARM Android
: -- normal (vote)
: Firefox 17
Assigned To: Nobody; OK to take it and work on it
: Sebastian Kaspari (:sebastian)
: 767668 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2012-07-18 11:57 PDT by Aaron Train [:aaronmt]
Modified: 2012-07-30 14:49 PDT (History)
6 users (show)
See Also:
Crash Signature:
QA Whiteboard:
Iteration: ---
Points: ---
Has Regression Range: ---
Has STR: ---

Patch (2.05 KB, patch)
2012-07-24 15:47 PDT, Sriram Ramasubramanian [:sriram]
mbrubeck: review+
lukasblakk+bugs: approval‑mozilla‑aurora+
lukasblakk+bugs: approval‑mozilla‑beta+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Description Aaron Train [:aaronmt] 2012-07-18 11:57:40 PDT
Load up a new profile of Fennec on Jellybean 4.1.x and open the custom menu - in comparison to ICS it 'inflates' a tad slower the first time. 

Tested via:

Nightly (07/18)
Galaxy Nexus (Android 4.1.1)
Comment 1 Sriram Ramasubramanian [:sriram] 2012-07-24 15:47:08 PDT
Created attachment 645548 [details] [diff] [review]

The problem was depending on child's height -- which is 0 until it is shown for the first time -- which caused the problem.
Hence the ScrollView measured a 0, and then the actual height -- showing the flickering.
Instead, this does an AT_MOST call on preferred height of 75% of screen height. This fixes the problem.
Comment 2 Sriram Ramasubramanian [:sriram] 2012-07-24 15:49:17 PDT
*** Bug 767668 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 Alex Keybl [:akeybl] 2012-07-24 15:50:30 PDT
Moving the tracking flags over from bug 767668.
Comment 4 Matt Brubeck (:mbrubeck) 2012-07-24 16:19:30 PDT
Comment on attachment 645548 [details] [diff] [review]


>         protected void onMeasure(int widthMeasureSpec, int heightMeasureSpec) {
>+            super.onMeasure(widthMeasureSpec, heightMeasureSpec);
>             DisplayMetrics metrics = new DisplayMetrics();
>             ((Activity) GeckoApp.mAppContext).getWindowManager().getDefaultDisplay().getMetrics(metrics);
>             // heightPixels changes during rotation.
>+            int restrictedHeightSpec = MeasureSpec.makeMeasureSpec((int) (0.75 * metrics.heightPixels), MeasureSpec.AT_MOST);
>             super.onMeasure(widthMeasureSpec, restrictedHeightSpec);
>         }

We're calling super.onMeasure twice now.  Is the first call still useful, or should it be removed?
Comment 5 Sriram Ramasubramanian [:sriram] 2012-07-24 16:21:35 PDT
The first call is still useful. I still removing it and it failed.
So (from my understanding), the first call makes the size to be 100% of its children (which may fill the entire screen). The second call restricts the height to 75%.
We do super.onMeasure() which takes care of setMeasuredDimension().
Comment 6 Sriram Ramasubramanian [:sriram] 2012-07-24 21:35:39 PDT
Comment 7 Sriram Ramasubramanian [:sriram] 2012-07-24 21:36:27 PDT
Comment on attachment 645548 [details] [diff] [review]

[Approval Request Comment]
Bug caused by (feature/regressing bug #): -
User impact if declined: The menu will take time to show in JB. HTC will have visual glitches.
Testing completed (on m-c, etc.): Landed in m-i on 07/24
Risk to taking this patch (and alternatives if risky): None.
String or UUID changes made by this patch: None.
Comment 8 Ed Morley [:emorley] 2012-07-25 08:09:44 PDT
Comment 9 Lukas Blakk [:lsblakk] use ?needinfo 2012-07-25 13:49:07 PDT
Comment on attachment 645548 [details] [diff] [review]

no risk, mobile only - approving.
Comment 10 Sriram Ramasubramanian [:sriram] 2012-07-27 00:04:40 PDT
Pushed to aurora:
Comment 11 Sriram Ramasubramanian [:sriram] 2012-07-27 00:09:19 PDT
Pushed to beta:
Comment 12 Daniel Asarnow 2012-07-30 14:45:36 PDT
I am still seeing bug 767668 (duplicate of this bug) in Beta. Did the beta update of 7/27 include Sriram's fixes?
Comment 13 Matt Brubeck (:mbrubeck) 2012-07-30 14:49:36 PDT
(In reply to Daniel Asarnow from comment #12)
> I am still seeing bug 767668 (duplicate of this bug) in Beta. Did the beta
> update of 7/27 include Sriram's fixes?

No, it didn't.  This fix will be included in the next beta update (probably later this week).

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.