Bug 146459 - [Win] Remove LegacyCACFLaterTreeHost Implementation
Summary: [Win] Remove LegacyCACFLaterTreeHost Implementation
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 147388
Alias: None
Product: WebKit
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Layout and Rendering (show other bugs)
Version: 528+ (Nightly build)
Hardware: PC All
: P2 Normal
Assignee: Brent Fulgham
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2015-06-30 10:02 PDT by Brent Fulgham
Modified: 2015-08-05 09:25 PDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Brent Fulgham 2015-06-30 10:02:42 PDT
Now that we've moved our target OS to Windows 7, I don't think there is a need to retain the old LegacyCACFLayerTreeHost implementation. This code path is only used for the Apple Windows port, and I don't think there are any active cases where we hit this code anymore.
Comment 1 Brent Fulgham 2015-06-30 10:03:12 PDT
CC'ing aroben in case I'm missing something regarding this code.
Comment 2 Adam Roben (:aroben) 2015-06-30 12:09:37 PDT
Is there some new mechanism being used for accelerated compositing on Windows 7+?
Comment 3 Adam Roben (:aroben) 2015-06-30 12:14:14 PDT
Oh, I see, WKCACFViewLayerTreeHost is the replacement. The code makes it look like that class is used whenever WebKitQuartzCoreAdditions.dll is present, which seems like it shouldn't be dependent on the version of Windows being run. I think the only consideration is whether you want to support old versions of AAS that don't contain that DLL.
Comment 4 Brent Fulgham 2015-07-01 13:48:01 PDT
(In reply to comment #3)
> Oh, I see, WKCACFViewLayerTreeHost is the replacement. The code makes it
> look like that class is used whenever WebKitQuartzCoreAdditions.dll is
> present, which seems like it shouldn't be dependent on the version of
> Windows being run. I think the only consideration is whether you want to
> support old versions of AAS that don't contain that DLL.

Yeah -- I don't think there is any such thing (at least, not that we want to be supporting).

So I think it's just dead code at this point.
Comment 5 Brent Fulgham 2015-08-05 09:25:39 PDT

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 147388 ***