the idea is to move 'platform' specific instrumentation code from WebCoreMemoryInstrumentation into the new PlatformMemoryInstrumentation. the instrumentation for String* also has to be moved.
Created attachment 163310 [details] Patch
Comment on attachment 163310 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=163310&action=review > Source/WebCore/platform/PlatformMemoryInstrumentation.h:42 > +template<> void MemoryInstrumentationTraits::addInstrumentedObject<KURL>(MemoryInstrumentation*, const KURL* const&, MemoryObjectType, MemoryOwningType); These should go into Source/WTF
(In reply to comment #2) > (From update of attachment 163310 [details]) > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=163310&action=review > > > Source/WebCore/platform/PlatformMemoryInstrumentation.h:42 > > +template<> void MemoryInstrumentationTraits::addInstrumentedObject<KURL>(MemoryInstrumentation*, const KURL* const&, MemoryObjectType, MemoryOwningType); > > These should go into Source/WTF I mean that Strin* instrumentation should be in Source/WTF.
Comment on attachment 163310 [details] Patch Attachment 163310 [details] did not pass win-ews (win): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13811479
Comment on attachment 163310 [details] Patch Attachment 163310 [details] did not pass mac-ews (mac): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13826160
Created attachment 163346 [details] Patch
Created attachment 163347 [details] rebaselined
Created attachment 163353 [details] with fix for debug build
Comment on attachment 163353 [details] with fix for debug build Attachment 163353 [details] did not pass mac-ews (mac): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13825214
Comment on attachment 163353 [details] with fix for debug build Attachment 163353 [details] did not pass win-ews (win): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13820377
Comment on attachment 163353 [details] with fix for debug build Attachment 163353 [details] did not pass qt-wk2-ews (qt): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13822321
Comment on attachment 163353 [details] with fix for debug build Attachment 163353 [details] did not pass efl-ews (efl): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13820388
Comment on attachment 163353 [details] with fix for debug build Attachment 163353 [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13809008 New failing tests: inspector/profiler/memory-instrumentation-cached-images.html
Created attachment 163851 [details] Patch
Comment on attachment 163851 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=163851&action=review > Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:8 > + the target is to move 'platform' specific instrumentation code the -> The > Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:11 > + Drive by fix: New type DOM.Image was introduced. I don't see DOM.Image in the change, did you mean Page.Image?
Committed r128451: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/128451>
(In reply to comment #16) > Committed r128451: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/128451> It caused a regression. Could you check it, please? https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96653
(In reply to comment #17) > (In reply to comment #16) > > Committed r128451: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/128451> > > It caused a regression. Could you check it, please? > https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96653 Will do.
(In reply to comment #13) > (From update of attachment 163353 [details]) > Attachment 163353 [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb): > Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13809008 > > New failing tests: > inspector/profiler/memory-instrumentation-cached-images.html You could have avoided to check in this regression if you take notice of the EWS bot ...
(In reply to comment #19) > (In reply to comment #13) > > (From update of attachment 163353 [details] [details]) > > Attachment 163353 [details] [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb): > > Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13809008 > > > > New failing tests: > > inspector/profiler/memory-instrumentation-cached-images.html > > You could have avoided to check in this regression > if you take notice of the EWS bot ... You're right, I'm sorry that did not check this before.