Bug 96224 – Refactor SMILTimeContainer::updateAnimations to not do extra work

• Component: SVG
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Philip Rogers]

SMILTimeContainer::updateAnimations is hot for users with many simultaneous animations and it contains some low hanging fruit for improving code readability and reducing unnecessary codepaths.

[Philip Rogers]

Created attachment 163033 [details]
Remove unnecessary codepaths in SMILTimeContainer::updateAnimations

[Nikolas Zimmermann]

Comment on attachment 163033 [details]
Remove unnecessary codepaths in SMILTimeContainer::updateAnimations

Looks good, r=me!

[Stephen Chenney]

Comment on attachment 163033 [details]
Remove unnecessary codepaths in SMILTimeContainer::updateAnimations

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=163033&action=review

> Source/WebCore/svg/animation/SMILTimeContainer.cpp:249
>  

I would like to see an else on this asserting that the resultElement != animation. Because if it is equal, you may be adding it twice to the resultElements below.

> Source/WebCore/svg/animation/SMILTimeContainer.cpp:251
> +        if (animation->progress(elapsed, resultElement, seekToTime) && resultElement == animation)

If resultElement was already animation at line 243 above, then we might be adding it again here. I think that here you should be checking accumulatedResultElement instead of resultElement == animation.

[Philip Rogers]

Comment on attachment 163033 [details]
Remove unnecessary codepaths in SMILTimeContainer::updateAnimations

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=163033&action=review

Thanks for the review schenney!

>> Source/WebCore/svg/animation/SMILTimeContainer.cpp:249
>>  
> 
> I would like to see an else on this asserting that the resultElement != animation. Because if it is equal, you may be adding it twice to the resultElements below.

An assert that this doesn't happen seems useful. Adding in new patch momentarily

>> Source/WebCore/svg/animation/SMILTimeContainer.cpp:251
>> +        if (animation->progress(elapsed, resultElement, seekToTime) && resultElement == animation)
> 
> If resultElement was already animation at line 243 above, then we might be adding it again here. I think that here you should be checking accumulatedResultElement instead of resultElement == animation.

I think the new assert from your other comment will cover this case without the extra bool.

[Philip Rogers]

Created attachment 163206 [details]
Patch for landing

Thank you for the review Nikolas!

Patch: off to the commit queue you go.

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 163206 [details]
Patch for landing

Rejecting attachment 163206 [details] from review queue.

[e-mail] does not have reviewer permissions according to http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/common/config/committers.py.

- If you do not have reviewer rights please read http://webkit.org/coding/contributing.html for instructions on how to use bugzilla flags.

- If you have reviewer rights please correct the error in Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/common/config/committers.py by adding yourself to the file (no review needed).  The commit-queue restarts itself every 2 hours.  After restart the commit-queue will correctly respect your reviewer rights.

[Philip Rogers]

Created attachment 163207 [details]
Lets try this again...

Oops--marked as r+ but I should have left review blank so it would pick up Niko's r+.

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 163207 [details]
Lets try this again...

Clearing flags on attachment: 163207

Committed r128131: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/128131>

[WebKit Review Bot]

All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.