Bug 113137 – Test if non-immediate descendants obscure background

• Component: Layout and Rendering
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Antti Koivisto]

The current obscuration test only covers immediate children. We can find more cases by looking deeper into descendants.

[Antti Koivisto]

Created attachment 194707 [details]
patch

[David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)]

Comment on attachment 194707 [details]
patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=194707&action=review

> Source/WebCore/loader/cache/CachedImage.cpp:468
> +    fprintf(stderr, "CachedImage::animationAdvanced\n");

You probably want to remove this before committing.

[Antti Koivisto]

Created attachment 194720 [details]
rebase with less printf

[kov's GTK+ EWS bot]

Comment on attachment 194720 [details]
rebase with less printf

Attachment 194720 [details] did not pass gtk-ews (gtk):
Output: http://webkit-commit-queue.appspot.com/results/17193786

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 194720 [details]
rebase with less printf

Attachment 194720 [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb):
Output: http://webkit-commit-queue.appspot.com/results/17197845

New failing tests:
css3/filters/custom/effect-custom-combined-missing.html
fast/replaced/border-radius-clip-content-edge.html

[WebKit Review Bot]

Created attachment 194739 [details]
Archive of layout-test-results from gce-cr-linux-05 for chromium-linux-x86_64

The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the chromium-ews.
Bot: gce-cr-linux-05  Port: chromium-linux-x86_64  Platform: Linux-3.3.8-gcg-201212281604-x86_64-with-GCEL-10.04-gcel_10.04

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 194720 [details]
rebase with less printf

Attachment 194720 [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb):
Output: http://webkit-commit-queue.appspot.com/results/17295126

New failing tests:
css3/filters/custom/effect-custom-combined-missing.html
fast/replaced/border-radius-clip-content-edge.html

[WebKit Review Bot]

Created attachment 194740 [details]
Archive of layout-test-results from gce-cr-linux-04 for chromium-linux-x86_64

The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the chromium-ews.
Bot: gce-cr-linux-04  Port: chromium-linux-x86_64  Platform: Linux-3.3.8-gcg-201212281604-x86_64-with-GCEL-10.04-gcel_10.04

[Antti Koivisto]

Created attachment 194767 [details]
elements with filters may be transparent

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 194767 [details]
elements with filters may be transparent

Attachment 194767 [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb):
Output: http://webkit-commit-queue.appspot.com/results/17318088

New failing tests:
fast/replaced/border-radius-clip-content-edge.html
fast/css/font-family-pictograph.html

[WebKit Review Bot]

Created attachment 194771 [details]
Archive of layout-test-results from gce-cr-linux-08 for chromium-linux-x86_64

The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the chromium-ews.
Bot: gce-cr-linux-08  Port: chromium-linux-x86_64  Platform: Linux-3.3.8-gcg-201212281604-x86_64-with-GCEL-10.04-gcel_10.04

[Antti Koivisto]

border-radius-clip-content-edge.html needs rebase of chromium image test results, the other failures don't look real.

[Simon Fraser (smfr)]

Comment on attachment 194767 [details]
elements with filters may be transparent

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=194767&action=review

> Source/WebCore/rendering/RenderBox.cpp:1220
> +        if (childLayer->zIndex() < 0)
> +            return false;

It's hard to me to know whether this test is reliable, without an explicit check for the childBox's stacking context being some specific ancestor. For example, what happens if the renderer we're checking for opaqueness is A here:

<div style="postion: absolute; z-index: 0"> <!-- stacking context -->
  <div style="postion: absolute; z-index: -2"> <!-- A -->
    <div style="postion: absolute; z-index: -1"></div>
  </div>
</div>

[Antti Koivisto]

Created attachment 195191 [details]
use simple z-index:auto test, update a chromium pixel test

[Simon Fraser (smfr)]

Comment on attachment 195191 [details]
use simple z-index:auto test, update a chromium pixel test

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=195191&action=review

> LayoutTests/ChangeLog:12
> +        * platform/chromium-linux/fast/replaced/border-radius-clip-expected.png: rebased

Was this you?

[Antti Koivisto]

(In reply to comment #15)
> > LayoutTests/ChangeLog:12
> > +        * platform/chromium-linux/fast/replaced/border-radius-clip-expected.png: rebased
> 
> Was this you?

Yeah, grabbed it from the bot-generated archive though I managed to replace a wrong file.

[Antti Koivisto]

http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/146955 

(without the chromium border-radius-clip-content-edge.html pixel result rebase)