Bug 11345

Summary:

1 fewer shouldChangeSelection delegate call for fast/forms/focus-control-to-page

Product:

WebKit

Reporter:

Adam Roben (:aroben) <aroben>

Component:

Forms

Assignee:

Geoffrey Garen <ggaren>

Status:

RESOLVED FIXED

Severity:

Normal

CC:

aroben, timothy

Priority:

Keywords:

LayoutTestFailure, Regression

Version:

420+

Hardware:

Mac

OS:

OS X 10.4

URL:

http://build.webkit.org/results/post-commit-powerpc-mac-os-x/3898/fast/forms/focus-control-to-page-diffs.txt

Attachments:

Description	Flags
fix	ggaren: review+

Adam Roben (:aroben)

Reported 2006-10-18 01:50:09 PDT

The new listbox control (landed in r16718) broke fast/forms/display-none-in-onchange-keyboard

Attachments
fix (3.85 KB, patch) 2006-10-20 12:18 PDT, Geoffrey Garen	ggaren: review+	Details Formatted Diff Diff
View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.

Adam Roben (:aroben)

Comment 1 2006-10-18 01:51:03 PDT

Looking at the test page and tabbing among the controls manually, it seems that the "two" item in the second <select> doesn't get focused. Perhaps this is the problem?

Adam Roben (:aroben)

Comment 2 2006-10-18 12:57:39 PDT

I was clearly too tired when filing these bugs. The test broken by this change is actually fast/forms/focus-control-to-page

Adam Roben (:aroben)

Comment 3 2006-10-18 12:58:29 PDT

To be clear, r16718 (new RenderListBox) broke fast/forms/focus-control-to-page.

Adele Peterson

Comment 4 2006-10-18 14:19:11 PDT

I rolled out the list box change, and the test still fails

Geoffrey Garen

Comment 5 2006-10-19 15:01:05 PDT

I'll take this one.

Geoffrey Garen

Comment 6 2006-10-19 15:09:52 PDT

Nightlies confirm that this regression happened from r16710 to 16729.

Geoffrey Garen

Comment 7 2006-10-19 15:43:30 PDT

Surprisingly, rolling out 16718 and 16719 doesn't fix the bug.

Geoffrey Garen

Comment 8 2006-10-19 16:57:46 PDT

Narrowed down to 16710:16720.

Geoffrey Garen

Comment 9 2006-10-19 17:15:05 PDT

Narrowed down to 16714:16717.

Geoffrey Garen

Comment 10 2006-10-19 17:27:42 PDT

Narrowed down to 16715:16717, which by the way is impossible, so... ?

Adam Roben (:aroben)

Comment 11 2006-10-19 17:59:38 PDT

Did you narrow this down by rolling out changes, or actually going back to those revisions and testing?

Geoffrey Garen

Comment 12 2006-10-20 09:57:52 PDT

Some of each. New data: r16718 has the regression. Rolling back to r16717 fixes the regression. However, Rolling r16718 out of TOT does not fix the regression.

Geoffrey Garen

Comment 13 2006-10-20 12:18:26 PDT

Created attachment 11169 [details] fix Beth reviewed this.

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