Bug 193943

Summary: Rename ChildProcess to AuxiliaryProcess
Product: WebKit Reporter: Alex Christensen <achristensen>
Component: New BugsAssignee: Alex Christensen <achristensen>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED    
Severity: Normal CC: aestes, cdumez, ews-watchlist, ggaren, sam, webkit-bug-importer
Priority: P2 Keywords: InRadar
Version: WebKit Nightly Build   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Attachments:
Description Flags
Patch aestes: review+

Alex Christensen
Reported 2019-01-28 17:34:32 PST
Rename ChildProcess to AuxiliaryProcess
Attachments
Patch (308.64 KB, patch)
2019-01-28 17:36 PST, Alex Christensen 		aestes: review+
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Alex Christensen
Comment 1 2019-01-28 17:36:32 PST
Created attachment 360408 [details] Patch
EWS Watchlist
Comment 2 2019-01-28 17:39:55 PST
Attachment 360408 [details] did not pass style-queue: ERROR: Source/WebKit/Shared/mac/AuxiliaryProcessMac.mm:63: Misplaced OS version check. Please use a named macro in wtf/Platform.h, wtf/FeatureDefines.h, or an appropriate internal file. [build/version_check] [5] ERROR: Source/WebKit/Shared/mac/AuxiliaryProcessMac.mm:75: Extra space after ( [whitespace/parens] [2] ERROR: Source/WebKit/Shared/mac/AuxiliaryProcessMac.mm:75: Extra space before ) [whitespace/parens] [2] ERROR: Source/WebKit/WebProcess/wpe/WebProcessMainWPE.cpp:30: Alphabetical sorting problem. [build/include_order] [4] ERROR: Source/WebKit/WebProcess/gtk/WebProcessMainGtk.cpp:30: Alphabetical sorting problem. [build/include_order] [4] Total errors found: 5 in 68 files If any of these errors are false positives, please file a bug against check-webkit-style.
Andy Estes
Comment 3 2019-01-29 12:52:43 PST
Comment on attachment 360408 [details] Patch rs=me
Alex Christensen
Comment 4 2019-01-29 14:13:06 PST
https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/240683/webkit
Radar WebKit Bug Importer
Comment 5 2019-01-29 14:14:28 PST
<rdar://problem/47645448>
Geoffrey Garen
Comment 6 2019-01-29 15:10:23 PST
LOL, did you remove all use of ChildProcess? I thought only NetworkProcess wanted this distinction?
Chris Dumez
Comment 7 2019-01-29 15:14:31 PST
(In reply to Geoffrey Garen from comment #6) > LOL, did you remove all use of ChildProcess? I thought only NetworkProcess > wanted this distinction? This was my understanding as well. This is a lot of code churn just for one of the child processes.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.