RESOLVED FIXED 86157
Should have Node::inDetach() for assertion purposes.
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86157
Summary Should have Node::inDetach() for assertion purposes.
Hajime Morrita
Reported 2012-05-10 16:47:19 PDT
This is followup on Bug 85963 where we removed Node::inDetach(). The rationale of the removal is that inDetach() should never be true for its caller. But it's safe to assert() it instead of just completely remove it for a while.
Attachments
Patch (2.89 KB, patch)
2012-05-10 18:24 PDT, Hajime Morrita
no flags
Patch (2.90 KB, patch)
2012-05-10 18:27 PDT, Hajime Morrita
no flags
Patch (2.98 KB, patch)
2012-05-13 17:47 PDT, Hajime Morrita
no flags
Darin Adler
Comment 1 2012-05-10 17:26:11 PDT
I don’t think we have to switch to an assertion. If we can prove to ourselves somehow that Node::detach does not call out to anything that can run “arbitrary” code, then we’re OK. But <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/116644> seems to have assumed this without investigating and proving it!
Hajime Morrita
Comment 2 2012-05-10 18:24:55 PDT
Hajime Morrita
Comment 3 2012-05-10 18:27:10 PDT
Hajime Morrita
Comment 4 2012-05-10 18:27:31 PDT
Hi Darin, could you take a look at this small piece?
Darin Adler
Comment 5 2012-05-12 08:42:44 PDT
Comment on attachment 141307 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=141307&action=review > Source/WebCore/dom/Node.cpp:1343 > +static Node* detachingNode; > + > +bool Node::inDetach() const > +{ > + return detachingNode == this; > +} This global variable and the body of the inDetach function should be NDEBUG-only. We don’t want to pay the price for setting a global used only for assertions in a build without assertions.
Darin Adler
Comment 6 2012-05-12 08:43:31 PDT
While an assertion is OK, what I’m really interested in is studying the code thinking through whether this problem is guaranteed not to happen rather than trying to prove that it doesn’t happen by testing with an assertion in place.
Hajime Morrita
Comment 7 2012-05-13 17:47:25 PDT
Hajime Morrita
Comment 8 2012-05-13 17:51:31 PDT
Hi darin, thanks for the comment. I updated the patch. (In reply to comment #6) > While an assertion is OK, what I’m really interested in is studying the code thinking through whether this problem is guaranteed not to happen rather than trying to prove that it doesn’t happen by testing with an assertion in place. Here is an investigation: There are three non-trivial function called from Node::detach() - Document::hoveredNodeDetached(); - Document::activeChainNodeDetached(); - RnderObject::destroyAndCleanupAnonymousWrappers(); First two Document methods are clearly innocent. They just start a timer or mutate its internal member variables. - http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Source/WebCore/dom/Document.cpp#L3603 - http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Source/WebCore/dom/Document.cpp#L3615 Although destroyAndCleanupAnonymousWrappers() isn't so obviously innocent, in fact it is: This is because any focus change won't be initiated by rendering side. Especially not by anonymous ROs. It looks there is clear responsibility boundary between dom/ and rendering/ on this focus concept, and it is DOM side responsibility to maintain the focus, in my understanding.
Hajime Morrita
Comment 9 2012-05-13 23:55:53 PDT
Comment on attachment 141621 [details] Patch Thanks for quick review! landing...
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 10 2012-05-14 00:49:15 PDT
Comment on attachment 141621 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 141621 Committed r116927: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/116927>
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 11 2012-05-14 00:49:20 PDT
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.