Summary: | REGRESSION(r213226): Speculative rollout, might be causing several failures and crashes in WebKitGTK+ (Requested by lajava on #webkit). | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | WebKit Commit Bot <commit-queue> | ||||
Component: | New Bugs | Assignee: | WebKit Commit Bot <commit-queue> | ||||
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||
Severity: | Normal | CC: | cgarcia, mcatanzaro, youennf | ||||
Priority: | P2 | ||||||
Version: | WebKit Nightly Build | ||||||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||
OS: | Unspecified | ||||||
Bug Depends on: | |||||||
Bug Blocks: | 169024 | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
WebKit Commit Bot
2017-03-01 12:57:10 PST
Created attachment 303102 [details] ROLLOUT of r213226 Any committer can land this patch automatically by marking it commit-queue+. The commit-queue will build and test the patch before landing to ensure that the rollout will be successful. This process takes approximately 15 minutes. If you would like to land the rollout faster, you can use the following command: webkit-patch land-attachment ATTACHMENT_ID where ATTACHMENT_ID is the ID of this attachment. r213225 is the last known-good commit. 213228 is the first known-bad commit. r213227 is Windows-specific. r213228 is Apple-specific. So must be r213226 indeed. Comment on attachment 303102 [details] ROLLOUT of r213226 Clearing flags on attachment: 303102 Committed r213239: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/213239> All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug. (In reply to comment #2) > r213225 is the last known-good commit. 213228 is the first known-bad commit. > > r213227 is Windows-specific. r213228 is Apple-specific. So must be r213226 > indeed. It was easier, just look at the crash bt, it's crashing in #0 0x00007fcbac044329 in _ZNK7WebCore16ResourceResponse25platformSuggestedFilenameEv () from /home/slave/webkitgtk/gtk-linux-64-release/build/WebKitBuild/Release/lib/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37 Thanks for rolling this out, after my "land patch go home", I only ran the affected tests, I guess I didn't consider the case of the content-disposition header not being present or something like that. |