| Summary: | Unify determination of page timer alignment | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Gavin Barraclough <barraclough> | ||||
| Component: | WebKit Misc. | Assignee: | Gavin Barraclough <barraclough> | ||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||
| Severity: | Normal | ||||||
| Priority: | P2 | ||||||
| Version: | Other | ||||||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Gavin Barraclough
2016-03-04 12:16:09 PST
Created attachment 273024 [details]
Fix
Comment on attachment 273024 [details] Fix View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=273024&action=review r=me > Source/WebCore/page/Page.cpp:1260 > + else if (!m_timerAlignmentIntervalIncreaseTimer.isActive()) This is not new but is it possible for m_timerAlignmentInterval to change and for the timer to be active? If so, we currently fail to update the timer. I am guessing we may be working around this by disabling and then re-enabling throttling but if so, it is not very nice. (In reply to comment #2) > Comment on attachment 273024 [details] > > This is not new but is it possible for m_timerAlignmentInterval to change > and for the timer to be active? If so, we currently fail to update the > timer. I am guessing we may be working around this by disabling and then > re-enabling throttling but if so, it is not very nice. Per conversation with Chris, this is a deliberate part of the policy, as a simple solution to prevent timers from being pushed out infinitely. Transmitting file data ... Committed revision 197581. |