Summary: | Percent-width blocks cannot form a re-layout boundary | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Ahmad Saleem <ahmad.saleem792> |
Component: | Layout and Rendering | Assignee: | Nobody <webkit-unassigned> |
Status: | REOPENED --- | ||
Severity: | Normal | CC: | bfulgham, commit-queue, simon.fraser, webkit-bug-importer, zalan |
Priority: | P2 | Keywords: | InRadar |
Version: | Safari Technology Preview | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
URL: | https://jsfiddle.net/y07soapn/show | ||
Bug Depends on: | 248967 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Ahmad Saleem
2022-11-14 13:23:31 PST
Committed 256901@main (b42824bb6c99): <https://commits.webkit.org/256901@main> Reviewed commits have been landed. Closing PR #6677 and removing active labels. Re-opened since this is blocked by bug 248967 @Alan - I noticed that I didn't did 'const' part in this merge for object().style(). Could this help in the performance issue in page loading? I can do PR but is it possible to run it via some A/B testing internally to see whether 'const' part does not regress performance? const auto* style = object->style(); (In reply to Ahmad Saleem from comment #4) > @Alan - I noticed that I didn't did 'const' part in this merge for > object().style(). Could this help in the performance issue in page loading? > > I can do PR but is it possible to run it via some A/B testing internally to > see whether 'const' part does not regress performance? > > const auto* style = object->style(); This compiles: const auto& style = object->style(); if (!style.width().isFixed() || !style.height().isFixed()) return false; (In reply to Ahmad Saleem from comment #4) > @Alan - I noticed that I didn't did 'const' part in this merge for > object().style(). Could this help in the performance issue in page loading? > > I can do PR but is it possible to run it via some A/B testing internally to > see whether 'const' part does not regress performance? > > const auto* style = object->style(); I am not sure if that's what the PLT regression is about. I think the expensive part of this change is where we can't (incorrectly) do boundary layout anymore on certain type of content (which means spending more time in layout). We probably need to find a different way of addressing this correctness issue. |