Don't we farm out a separate process for favicon decoding? And for theme image decoding as well?
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Jeremy Orlow<[email protected]> wrote: > Are there other things currently done in the browser process that'd be nice > to do in a sandboxed utility process like this? Is there any work that the > browser farms out to renderer processes that might be cleaner to do in a > utility process? > If so, I'd propose making the design for this new process a bit more > general purpose. Honestly, I don't think there's much to do. And I think > it'd be OK to say that all work done by this process would need to be > stateless (so we can kill it and spin it back up at will). > I'm not necessarily saying you need to do the work to make it general > purpose now, but I definitely think it should be kept in mind while working > on this. That way we don't need to worry about finding ourselves designed > into a corner (and needing to create another another helper process). > J > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Eric Roman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Here is a design document for http://crbug.com/11746 >> >> >> http://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/developers/design-documents/out-of-process-v8-pac >> >> Feedback welcome. >> >> > > > > > -- Mike Pinkerton Mac Weenie [email protected] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
