stuff, chalk some non-trivial changes to the
windows sandbox at the very least.
-cpu
On Dec 18, 2:49 pm, Adam Barth aba...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Charles Reis cr...@chromium.org wrote:
Any other examples of browser state that would be tough to restore? How bad
I hear you. The issue is to me endemic of singleton/lazyinstance
AtExit dtor - Singleton A Object dtor -- Singleton B ctor - AtExit
registration - bang
Basically the dtors of singletons do too much or the whole scheme
stinks.
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
Nice job. Thanks for doing this.
Now the critic:
Not too happy with the thunk generator:
VirtualAlloc(0, sizeof(_stdcallthunk), MEM_COMMIT | MEM_RESERVE,
PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE)
But I am too lazy right now to look at what does the VS2008 thunk
logic looks right now. I would expect the page to
Carlos
- Build PGO instrument again but could not finish PGO optimized with
a 22 Mb training file. Eats 11 GB while linking and slows to a crawl.
- Got a leased machine (in jail) that has 24 GB of ram, installed
everything and managed to build release. Next stop PGO.
Note: I does not feel
dotNet ASP pages have a class named HttpBrowserCapabilities that
returns what the name implies. If you go to the url below using chrome
you'll see an echo (in column 3) of what it thinks of your browser:
http://www.on-the-matrix.com/webtools/HttpBrowserCapabilities.aspx
Is there anything you
Kasting pkast...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 2:04 PM, cpu c...@chromium.org wrote:
Do we care about this? care as in crafting a test to detect
regressions?
How much we care is probably directly proportional to how much real web
developers use this.
PK
+1 on moving spell to the renderers.
We can memory map in the browser and map again the in renderers.
Hopefully read-only.
We eliminate the sync ipc and do not increase the memory usage.
On Oct 22, 2:42 pm, Steve Vandebogart vand...@chromium.org wrote:
It's been awhile since I looked at this,
I am with the others that don't see move sqlite to another process
as a natural outcome of these thread.
If using more memory is the concern, another process uses more memory.
sqlite is not crashing *that* much; yes it was the top crasher for a
while but it was a data race
Did somebody answer Marc-Antoine question?
I don't see us ever releasing pages. I can fathom that we are not
doing that so I must be reading the code wrong.
On Oct 1, 10:11 am, Erik Kay erik...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Mike Belshe mbel...@google.com wrote:
see
your bidding.
-cpu
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
--user-data-dir to specify the location for a new
profile.
-cpu
ps. There is a new sqlite wrapper but is not being used extensively
yet.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options
I believe brettw new sqlite wrappers removed that. Maybe he has not
landed it or I misunderstood. Let me check.
Of course even if landed I don't know to what revision you synch to.
Also that points to a bug, possibly sqlite db corruption. Do you mind
filling a bug or having one of the users
VS2010 has a lot of things that have been re-written, being hit by a
compiler code generation bug is that last thing you want. I'll say we
need to wait a few months after RTM before we move into that version.
But according to all reports it has a lot of good things in store for
us, including
The plot thickens, the main history db is also corrupted:
D:\test\corruptdbsqlite3.exe zzz\User Data\Default\History
SQLite version 3.6.17
Enter .help for instructions
Enter SQL statements terminated with a ;
sqlite PRAGMA integrity_check;
rowid 40017 missing from index visits_time_index
rowid
Larson gave me a profile that can consistently crash windows chrome
(beta). I haven't tried loading the profile myself but we have crash
dumps from it.
It crashes in:
0x69db6e5d [chrome.dll - fts2.c:453] getVarint --- access
violation at 0x0
0x69db6ef0 [chrome.dll -
1. So how much faster is the linking? I mean the release build
linking was the slow one. Debug linking wasn't that bad.
2. net is dependent of base.. so you could not swap base by itself,
right?
3. The native windows resource management will need to change in the
multiple dlls world. ATL has a
On Aug 24, 10:14 am, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Jeremy Moskovichjer...@chromium.org wrote:
* Due to some technical limitations with the FF libraries, we need to load
them in a separate process. It also doesn't seem like a good idea to run
code
If you followed the instructions in chromium (http://dev.chromium.org/
developers/how-tos/build-instructions-windows) recently and chose to
use VS2008 then this will be of interest.
The order was wrong, I just changed it. You need to install in the
following order:
1. VS2008 RTM
2. Windows SDK
, but as an easy interim step, could this work?
Has anybody looked into this?
-cpu
WaitForInputIdle:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms687022(VS.85).aspx
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change
We need a better way to talk about this perf gain. I agree is 12% ops/
second in that particular set of benchmarks. My recollection is that
we removed LFH because it was using too much memory. We need some form
of normalized score based on memory usage. In other words 12% with 25%
more memory
What are the results of this experiment?
On Jul 30, 12:15 pm, Huan Ren hu...@chromium.org wrote:
I just submitted a change (22080) that disables tcmalloc used on
Windows platform. The plan is keeping it in trunk for 24 hours and
then reverting it. The intentions are
- Having another round
Jut to be clear, we are happy that you used chromium to create your
proof-of-concept. I hope you take the comments above as constructive
critic.
The order W3C - webkit is not set on stone. You can also approach
webkit first, or find out who is the lead on CSS for webkit and talk
directly to that
If you have a well-known (yet subpar) anti-virus whose name I don't
want to mention. Your build might fail:
general error c101008d: Failed to write the updated manifest to the
resource of file
..\chrome\Release\sbox_integration_tests.exe
Solution: tweak your AV if you can.
Yes, the real reason is that there is an ongoing cost of keep that
version working including extra QA cycles for each release. In terms
of supporting a windows version with very few users we should focus
our efforts on Win7.
But you are welcome to keep an external fork. If there is any
Mike, yes we (I) increased the number of renderer processes for
machines with lots of ram. I think it tops now to 40 processes.
Our previous limit was not based on calculation but because we had
WaitForMultipleObjects(..) which has a 64 objects maximum and we had 2
objects per process so our
filed the bug: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=14631
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
On May 5, 10:44 am, Scott Hess sh...@chromium.org wrote:
I agree with the earlier argument about not larding startup with
things like writing new files to id the coming-up Chrome to
late-coming instances. An alternative might be to acquire a lock to
protect the profile, and write an id
Utility process is an amenable idea. We do something like that for
first-run import as well.
Key items, I can think of:
1- Utility process would not display UI (would it?)
2- We can allow a directory to be available for read/write
3- Use IPC for progress / heartbeat
In other words pretty much
On Apr 30, 3:26 pm, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 1:50 PM, cpu c...@chromium.org wrote:
Inhttp://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=revrevision=14983I
removed a CoInitialize
In http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=revrevision=14983 I
removed a CoInitialize()/CoUnInitialize() pair in the renderer process
of your favorite browser.
This should be the last one of them. COM should now be unusable from
the renderer.
As far as I can see, this was a leftover and we
As a hard and fast rule you can consider any crash where we are not
intentionally trying to crash (using __debugbreak(), DebugBreak(),
RaiseException() or CHECK ) as probably exploitable.
If you think a little bit about a crash you might be tempted to think
it is not exploitable, but is easy to
On Apr 2, 11:12 am, Marshall Greenblatt magreenbl...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi All,
Is there a current document that explains the multi-process crash
service/reporting design used by Chrome via crash_service? I see the
documents available athttp://code.google.com/p/google-breakpad/w/listbut
/scientists-successfully-create-human-bear-pig-chimera/
-cpu
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
On Mar 25, 2:52 pm, Mike Reed r...@android.com wrote:
Indeed, its unhinted to keep it small. That said, we could (with some
$$) have it hinted, either generically, or with cleartype in mind.
Our font fallback is incomplete, Uniscribe is a no-go due to the
sandbox. This seems something worth
On windows the exe/dll separation it was meant to simplify upgrade but
in practice the
exe changes frequently enough that we still need to support exe
upgrading in place.
We always wanted to have a do nothing exe that just loads the chrome
dll but that never
happened, reasons: 1) the sandbox 2)
On Mar 22, 8:47 am, empriser xueyunl...@gmail.com wrote:
There are more than 50,000 patches onhttp://codereview.chromium.org/;
I don't think so. 50k/365 = 140. That means 140 patches per day
including weekends. We are very active but not that active.
I have some questions about it:
How
11k directories for me on that path. Awesome find.
ProjectSection(WebsiteProperties) = preProject
Can't we just delete this section? or would VS put it back? if so
maybe we can put some
nonsense there so VS does not re-create it.
On Feb 19, 3:47 pm, Finnur Thorarinsson fin...@chromium.org
Are there any implications for sandboxing on the fork vs exec ? I
don't want us to paint ourselves in a corner when we implement the
sandbox.
On Feb 5, 9:57 am, Rahul Kuchhal kuch...@chromium.org wrote:
If file structure on Linux is anywhere like Windows than the shared library
(chrome.dll on
We don't launch renderers using LaunchApp, we use broker_service-
SpawnTarget(). I guess in other platforms that don't have a sandbox
you can replace that for whatever you want.
You can see BrowserRenderProcessHost::Init() for all the cruft that we
need to launch a renderer, I don't see a good
+1 to string16
I can't make performance or memory saving claims with a straight face
for any. We just don't process enough strings for us to matter.
On Feb 4, 9:57 am, Mike Belshe mbel...@google.com wrote:
The big string area is webkit, of course. If webkit were 100% UTF-8
already, we might
discussed long time ago.
If somebody asked me that they want to contribute a port of chrome on
Windows UI using MFC, I would say no. I just don't see the cost/
benefit.
Personally, Qt seems now the stronger toolkit, but I really don't have
a clue about linux development.
-cpu
On Jan 14, 9:55 am
If this is a common scenario, we might need to use another signal.
On Dec 6, 6:25 pm, Peter Kasting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 7:01 PM, cpu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Due to a series of changes in the last month, the app now thinks it
has been installed systemwide
On Dec 2, 6:09 pm, Marc-Antoine Ruel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like the idea of fixing test_shell and not trying to convert
everything at first.
But don't work on 5025, I think it's wasted time. It's a non-essential plugin.
..
There's zero reference to WMIUtil in the code so to fix
Ben, look at atlwin.h CWindowImplBaseT TBase, TWinTraits
::WindowProc
I believe that OnFinalMessage(window) is called right there if msg ==
WM_NCDESTROY
right about line 3101 on that file.
Does that help you sort out this?
On Nov 23, 3:08 pm, Ben Goodger (Google) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
44 matches
Mail list logo
