Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-08-06 Thread Dave Townsend
Since there were no further concerns voiced to the final proposal I've gone ahead and landed the change in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1653384. To be respected you must now set the MOZ_FORCE_DISABLE_E10S environment variable to the full application version. `mach run

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-19 Thread ISHIKAWA,chiaki
I think I have found an inconsistency in TB's pref setting during mochitest regarding e10s. The gory detail is in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1629433#c10 Major find (excerpt from the above bugzilla.) --- begin quote --- 1) Dynamically generated user.js files during tests of

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-18 Thread Magnus Melin
Currently Thunderbird doesn't work with e10s. Longer term I'm assuming we'll need to do necessary adaptions so that we can - but I suspect this is a slightly larger project... I've filed bug 1646648 to track this work. -Magnus On 2020-06-10 22:05, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: I can't speak for

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-17 Thread Gijs Kruitbosch
Having read all the responses here, I guess an adjusted proposal would be to switch to requiring the variable to be set to the build's version. Does that seem like it'd address your concerns? There were two other points raised that I wanted to briefly respond to: What does this proposal mean

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-12 Thread Henri Sivonen
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 11:13 PM James Teh wrote: > In general, this obviously makes a lot of sense. However, because there is > so much extra complication for accessibility when e10s is enabled, I find > myself disabling e10s in local opt/debug builds to isolate problems to the > core a11y

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-11 Thread Aaron Klotz
On 6/10/2020 2:09 PM, tom...@gmail.com wrote: * GeckoView still supports running in non-e10s mode, and inability to mimic that environment on desktop builds would complicate writing code that works on android. GeckoView's only technical reason for supporting non-e10s was FxR, but they have

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-10 Thread ISHIKAWA,chiaki
I can't speak for what TB development plan is. One thing I observe as an occasional submitter of TB patches is this. Thunderbird ditched |mozmill| test December 2019, and switched to mochitest in place of mozmill test. Unfortunately, valgrind no longer works locally for mochitest. This is

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-10 Thread James Teh
In general, this obviously makes a lot of sense. However, because there is so much extra complication for accessibility when e10s is enabled, I find myself disabling e10s in local opt/debug builds to isolate problems to the core a11y engine (vs the a11y e10s stuff). The ability to do this was

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-10 Thread tomica
I agree about not shipping this to our users, but I see several needs to keep this option for developers working on Firefox: * GeckoView still supports running in non-e10s mode, and inability to mimic that environment on desktop builds would complicate writing code that works on android. * As

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-10 Thread Gijs Kruitbosch
I can't speak for Thunderbird's plans, but either way these plans shouldn't affect them and is restricted to desktop Firefox; the pref still works there: https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/4bb2401ecbfce89af06fb2b4d0ea3557682bd8ff/toolkit/xre/nsAppRunner.cpp#5020-5024 , and they set it:

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-10 Thread David Major
I agree that it's a bad idea for users to be running permanently with this setting on their daily driver browsers. But the environment variable has been a huge productivity enhancer to reduce my mental load when setting up an extra-hairy debug session or taking system traces. I wish we could

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-10 Thread Gijs Kruitbosch
I was asked off-list why I'm not suggesting we remove support for the environment variable entirely (ie why keep it for tests). That's a good question, so I will attempt to address it. I think that's a laudable goal, but it's more work. Practically speaking, AIUI valgrind still runs with e10s

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-10 Thread Emilio Cobos Álvarez
What is the situation of Thunderbird? I think they don't have e10s enabled yet, and it may be worth at least knowing what their plans are. -- Emilio On Wed, Jun 10, 2020, 8:44 PM Dave Townsend wrote: > Non-e10s is such a different environment that I don't think we have any > hope of keeping

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

2020-06-10 Thread Dave Townsend
Non-e10s is such a different environment that I don't think we have any hope of keeping it working without running the full test suite in that mode and I don't think anyone wants to do that. Now that this has started breaking I think it is actively harmful to our users for us to allow them to