Re: Booting to the Web

On 11/12/2013 10:27 AM, Gabriele Svelto wrote: Being one of the persons who wrote this code I should really be doing a write-up of this in our Firefox OS architecture page but I didn't have enough time for it yet :-| I was actually thinking while reading your mail that it was a great write up

Re: PSA: Don't write out multiple Add/RemoveObserver calls manually, iterate over an array instead

On 2/17/2014 2:25 PM, Kyle Huey wrote: If you are observing several topics it's easy to forget to add a Remove call when adding new observer topic. If you instead write an array of topics and iterate over that it's impossible to screw up (e.g.

Re: We live in a memory-constrained world

On 2/21/2014 5:40 PM, Brian Smith wrote: On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Nicholas Nethercote n.netherc...@gmail.com wrote: Optimizations that wouldn't have been worthwhile in the desktop-only days are now worthwhile. For example, an optimization that saves 100 KiB of memory per process is

Re: Policing dead/zombie code in m-c

On 4/24/2014 9:20 AM, Benoit Jacob wrote: 2014-04-24 8:31 GMT-04:00 Henri Sivonen hsivo...@hsivonen.fi: I have prepared a queue of patches that removes Netscape-era (circa 1999) internationalization code that efforts to implement the Encoding Standard have shown unnecessary to have in Firefox.

Re: Intent to implement and ship: navigator.hardwareConcurrency

On May 15, 2014, at 1:26 AM, Rik Cabanier caban...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Ehsan Akhgari ehsan.akhg...@gmail.comwrote: ... Make it possible for authors to make a semi-informed decision on how to divide the work among workers. That can already be done

Re: Intent to implement: CSSOM-View scroll-behavior property

On 5/23/2014 6:12 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote: That isn't possible with APZ since the user might be actively scrolling and so if we just do something like div.scrollTop += hightOfNewContent; then the newly set scroll position will be based off of an old value which has already changed on the

proposal: cloneable input streams

Hello all, I'd like to propose an addition to our nsIInputStream infrastructure. Please let me know what you think. Basics: I propose adding this interface: interface nsICloneableInputStream : nsIInputStream { nsIInputStream clone(); }; The clone() method returns a copy of the

Re: Default storage

For new quota clients like SW Cache, what storage should we now use? Default? I was previously using persistent. Thanks! Ben - Original Message - From: Jan Varga jan.va...@gmail.com To: dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 6:04:51 PM Subject: Default storage

Re: Proposal: Change the coding style guide to allow an 'o' prefix to indicate out-params

I typically append Out to these parameter names. The o prefix would be more concise. +1 Thanks! Ben - Original Message - From: Seth Fowler s...@mozilla.com To: dev-platform dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 1:35:06 PM Subject: Proposal: Change the coding

Re: Intent to Ship: Fetch API

On Feb 21, 2015, at 7:44 PM, nsm.nik...@gmail.com wrote: Ben, are you ok with the clone() that just landed being enabled? If so, I'll flip the pref. Clone should be good to go. Thanks! Ben ___ dev-platform mailing list

Re: Fingerprinting of battery status?

Can we just reduce the accuracy of the API? Only give battery level at certain broad breakpoints? On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Chris Hofmann chofm...@mozilla.com wrote: I've seen a lot of GPS related tracking apps that use a lot of power putting up warnings to users that it might be time

Re: Intent to unship: Request.context

On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Ehsan Akhgari ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com wrote: This was shipped in Firefox 39, but this attribute is fairly useless without service workers since it can only be read from Request objects and its value will always be fetch for manually created Request objects.

Re: Intent to unship: jar: URIs from content

On Oct 16, 2015 6:17 PM, "Robert O'Callahan" wrote: > I guess the right fix would be to have a Web proxy service that accepts > URLs in a custom format, unpacks ZIP files and serves their contents. Bugzilla could do this in a service worker.

Re: Proposal: revisit and implement navigator.hardwareConcurrency

FWIW, I also think we should implement this. The clamping seems like a reasonable way to be conservative given the fingerprinting concerns. On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Luke Wagner wrote: > Since the original m.d.p thread on hardwareConcurrency last year: > >

service worker fetch interception riding to aurora 43

Hello all, Currently service workers are enabled in 42 to support push notifications, but network interception via the FetchEvent is disabled. We've made a lot of progress on the issues blocking this interception, however, and we feel we are ready to move forward. Therefore, we intend to let

Re: Intent to disable service workers in 45 ESR

Just to clarify, since some people asked: Firefox 44 = SW enabled Firefox 45 = SW enabled Firefox 45 ESR = SW disabled Only the ESR channel will be disabled. Normal 45 installs will have the feature enabled. Sorry for any confusion. Ben > On Dec 11, 2015, at 2:47 PM, Ben Kelly &

Intent to disable service workers in 45 ESR

Hello, We are currently planning to ship service workers in firefox 44 on both desktop and android. AFAIK, the next ESR is going to be firefox 45. We plan to disable service workers on all platforms for the ESR release. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1232029 We're doing this

Re: Too many oranges!

Ben > > Doug > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 4:00 PM Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> I'll triage the top orange tomorrow and try to find some owners for >> things. >> >> After the new year I'll set something weekly up to stay on top of things. &

unowned orange by team

Hi all, In an attempt to wrangle some of the orange plaguing the tree I've tried to triage the top unowned bugs by team. If you are working one of these bugs, please assign yourself to it. If you're not working a bug, but are assigned, please drop it so we can see the status. If you see bugs

Re: unowned orange by team

. Happy holidays everyone! Ben On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > In an attempt to wrangle some of the orange plaguing the tree I've tried > to triage the top unowned bugs by team. > > If you are working one of these bugs

Re: about:profiles and the new profile manager

I really like being able to manage my profiles within a normal firefox tab. Awesome! The replacement for the ProfileManager probably needs some UX work, though. It was not clear to me which profile was actually going to be launched if I clicked the "Start Nightly" button. On Fri, Dec 18, 2015

Re: Too many oranges!

Does anyone feel the changes to how intermittents are reported to bugs has affected things? We used to get a comment for each intermittent, but now its rolled up into a periodic summary. Perhaps people feel less urgency to fix things without the constant bugmail. Not that I want to advocate

Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

In Firefox 44 we intend to enable Service Workers and FetchEvents by default on desktop and android. These features will not be enabled on Firefox OS yet. They has been developed behind the following preferences: dom.serviceWorkers.enabled dom.serviceWorkers.interception.enabled

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > Another compat issue we need to fix is returning the same >> ServiceWorkerRegistration object repeatedly from certain APIs. This was >> something that changed a few times in both the spec and chrome. >> >> Fixing these

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbar...@mit.edu> wrote: > >> >> 1) How confident are we that the spec is stable/correct? >> > > The spec is converging

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > 1) How confident are we that the spec is stable/correct? > The spec is converging to a stable v1, but things are still changing. The core functionality has been stable for a while, though. > 2) How confident are we

Re: 32-bit developer edition?

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Jared Wein wrote: > We shouldn't hold back on providing a link to 64-bit Dev Edition users en > masse. I worry that running an A/B test will slow down the full release > without telling us much of anything that we don't already know. > > The user

32-bit developer edition?

Hi all, I noticed recently that all of the available download links for dev edition point to the 32-bit installer. Is there a reason for this? Given we are talking about how to upgrade existing users to 64-bit it would seem good to update the download links for new installs. Thanks. Ben

Re: 32-bit developer edition?

On Jun 3, 2016 2:15 AM, "Jet Villegas" wrote: > > We should offer both. If we get a net reduction in OOMs with 64-bit it seems to me we should make that the default download link. In any case, we're not showing a 64-bit link anywhere now. Who should I pester or where

Re: Service Worker - Offline fallback not working

On May 30, 2016 1:55 PM, "Mohit Bajoria" wrote: > Offline fallback event is not working. > Can anyone please let me know the error and help me solving the issue ? Can you describe what you expect and what you are actually seeing happen? There is no "offline fallback

Re: Common crashes due to MOZ_CRASH and MOZ_RELEASE_ASSERT

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Milan Sreckovic wrote: > On a side note, the one that stood out for me was a “TODO” one. A crash > seems to be a wrong way to tag TODOs :) > FWIW, this appears to have been fixed last week:

Heads Up: Cache API .add()/.addAll() non-backward compatible change

All, We just landed a change to the Cache API .add()/.addAll() methods here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1244764 These methods essentially perform a fetch() and then a cache.put(). Previously they would happily store a 40x or 50x response from the fetch() in the Cache. This

Re: Testing Wanted: APZ Scrollbar dragging

This suggests it's possible to use a Bluetooth mouse with an Android device: https://mobile.twitter.com/patrick_h_lauke/status/698898777562836992 On Feb 17, 2016 6:27 PM, "Benoit Girard" wrote: > This is mouse based. I don't believe we support mouses at all on mobile. I >

Re: Intent to implement: W3C WebAppSec credentialmanagement API

Thanks for taking this on Alex! I had some initial concerns with the API from a fetch/SW perspective, but Mike seems open to addressing them: https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-credential-management/issues/11 I believe Matthew Noorenberghe had some concerns about the necessity of the API given

Re: An analysis of content process memory overhead

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Nicolas B. Pierron < nicolas.b.pier...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Source compressions should already be enabled. I think we do not do it > for small sources, and for Huge sources, as the compression would either be > useless, or it would take a noticeable amount of

Re: Skia Content on OS X

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:44 AM, William Lachance wrote: > On 2016-03-22 11:21 AM, Mike de Boer wrote: > >> I was also quite curious, so I started clicking up the hierarchy of that >> bug and ended up at: >> >> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1154825#c1 < >>

Re: Redesigning the docshell/loadgroup/document interaction

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > Thoughts? Any obvious problems with this plan? > We have the concept of network requests made from workers not associated with a single document. For example, SharedWorker attached to multiple documents or a

Re: IPCStream landed in mozilla-central

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Honza Bambas <hbam...@mozilla.com> >> wrote: >> >>> And I do!

IPCStream landed in mozilla-central

Hi all, FYI, I've landed a new IPDL type in bug 1093357 called IPCStream. This is intended to make it easier to serialize nsIInputStreams across IPC. In short, IPCStream: 1) Supports our existing serializable nsInputStreams. 2) Also automatically handles send file descriptors using the

Re: IPCStream landed in mozilla-central

On May 21, 2016 7:45 AM, "Honza Bambas" wrote: > But that doesn't mean "a fixed length input stream" - actually I may not even follow how you have translated this to you. Sorry, I was thinking a single OnDataAvailable call for the one IPC call just passing the stream.

Re: IPCStream landed in mozilla-central

On May 21, 2016 9:44 AM, "Honza Bambas" wrote: > If it's nsPipeInputStream then it's definitely alright. OTOH, we do copy the memory, right? I was somehow hoping that you just expose the IPC-allocated buffers via your own implementation of nsIInputStream, avoiding coping to

Re: IPCStream landed in mozilla-central

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Honza Bambas <hbam...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> And I do! :) Actually any parent necko channel, mainly HTTP, which sends >> data to the child process.

Re: Redesigning the docshell/loadgroup/document interaction

On May 20, 2016 6:14 PM, "Jonas Sicking" wrote: > That doesn't sound good. We should give each worker its own loadgroup. > Independent of if it's a dedicated, shared or service worker. > > Or is there a reason to share loadgroup with the document that I'm missing? Not sure. I

Re: IPCStream landed in mozilla-central

On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > On May 21, 2016 9:44 AM, "Honza Bambas" <hbam...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > If it's nsPipeInputStream then it's definitely alright. OTOH, we do > copy the memory, right? I was somehow

Re: IPCStream landed in mozilla-central

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Honza Bambas wrote: > And I do! :) Actually any parent necko channel, mainly HTTP, which sends > data to the child process. We also have bug 1110596 which complains about > too much memory copying in that code. > Could your IPCStream be

Re: IPCStream landed in mozilla-central

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Andrew McCreight <amccrei...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > > 3) Supports async pipe streams using a new PSendStream actor from > > *child-to-parent*. I have p

Re: IPCStream landed in mozilla-central

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Andrew McCreight <amccrei...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > > 3) Supports async pipe streams using a new PSendStream actor from > > *child-to-parent*. I have p

Re: Intent to implement and ship: allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox sandbox flag

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > Support in other browsers: I believe Chrome supports this. I'm not sure > what the state is in other browsers. > Looks like chrome 46: https://www.chromestatus.com/feature/5708368589094912 I'm happy to see this

Re: PSA - With e10s enabled, initial browser in new windows will soon be remote by default

Mike, Do we still kill the child process if the last content tab is closed? For example, close all tabs in all windows except for an about:memory tab or something. Or do we keep the child process alive as long as the browser.xul window is alive? Keeping the process alive would actually make a

PSA: enabling auto-shutdown and restart of osfile async worker on nightly

Hi all, Please be aware I'm going to try enabling this pref on nightly later today: osfile.reset_worker_delay This will allow us to clean up the osfile async worker when its not in use to save system resources. It will then automatically restart the worker the next time its needed. This is

Re: PSA: enabling auto-shutdown and restart of osfile async worker on nightly

This is live in today's nightly. Again, please let me know if you run into problems. Thanks! Ben On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > Please be aware I'm going to try enabling this pref on nightly later today: > > osfi

Re: Intent to disable service workers and push in 52 ESR

I just filed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1338144 On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 4:26 AM, Kohei Yoshino <kohei.yosh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Do we already have a bug for this? Firefox 52 will be shipped just in 4 > weeks. > > > On 2017-01-18 10:49 AM, Ben Kelly

Re: Intent to disable service workers and push in 52 ESR

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirk...@ochtman.nl> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > While things have stabilized since then we are in process of making a > major > > architectural change in ord

Re: Intent to disable service workers and push in 52 ESR

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Till Schneidereit < t...@tillschneidereit.net> wrote: > That'll mean that Windows XP/Vista users won't have them. > > Might be ok, but means the bar for a decision like this should be somewhat > higher than usual, I think. > Understood, but that does not change

Re: Intent to disable service workers and push in 52 ESR

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > API. On the other hand, sites like caniuse.com clearly advertise that > ServiceWorkers are available in Firefox (and Chrome), and then going > back and not exposing that in the ESR population seems to me that in a >

Intent to disable service workers and push in 52 ESR

Hi all, I'd like to disable service workers in 52 ESR. This would also require disabling push notifications. A year ago we decided to disable service workers in 45 ESR because it was very new and unstable: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/mozilla.dev.platform/yuNHtDhl3lY/VWXOa8N9AgAJ

Re: Intent to implement and ship: isSecureContext attribute on workers

On Sep 23, 2016 9:15 PM, "Boris Zbarsky" > Concerns: No one else implements this so far, and it does add one interesting requirement: it requires that shared workers not be shared between secure and insecure contexts. Whichever one creates the shared worker first wins; the other creation attempt

Re: netwerk and media experts; feedback requests for background upload/download WebAPI video download use-case

I wrote a test using fetch() that seems to suggest we don't re-use in-progress requests at the http cache level. (Note, this downloads about 200MB... don't click on your mobile.) https://people.mozilla.org/~bkelly/fetch/http-cache/ On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Andrew Sutherland <

Re: Intent to unship: WorkerGlobalScope.onclose

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=790919 On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Eric Shepherd wrote: > Is there a bug for this? If so, please be sure it's got the > dev-doc-needed keyword. Thanks! > >

Re: PSA: some setTimeout()/setInterval() changes

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Mike Taylor <mi...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On 10/27/16 10:08 AM, Ben Kelly wrote: > >> The short story is that there should be very minimal observable >> difference. >> > > How do these changes compare with other browsers behavi

PSA: More setTimeout()/setInterval() changes

Hi all, FYI, I've landed some more timer changes in FF52 nightly. This builds on the work previously discussed here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.platform/obJ97zzl4Po As of today's nightly setTimeout() and setInterval() will more aggressively yield the main thread back

Re: Heads Up: Snappy library upgraded

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 5:03 AM, Jan Varga wrote: > Since the integration of bug 768074 [1] ​in Nightly, the new version of > the library is used. The library is used in IndexedDB, DOM cache, etc. > We are confident that the library is fully backwards-compatible and we > have

PSA: some setTimeout()/setInterval() changes

Hey all, Just FYI, I've landed a refactoring of how we suspend our timers in: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1303167 The short story is that there should be very minimal observable difference. The main changes you might see are: 1) Previously we shifted timers during things

Re: Intent to ship: requestIdleCallback

I think we need to fix this issue as well. I think it could probably be uplifted before requestIdleCallback() hits release, though. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1315260 On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Andreas Farre wrote: > As of 2016-11-7 I intend to turn

Re: Some recent crash-stats improvements

Does the "raw dump" tab support require special permissions? I don't see any way to download the memory report from: https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/report/index/1a572047-ac64-4add-a82f-a31512161004#tab-rawdump On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:

Re: Intent to Implement: Private Browsing Storage (IndexedDB, Blobs, etc)

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Kyle Machulis wrote: > AFAIK, Chrome's strategy for this is to just store everything in memory and > keep a fairly small size cap on it (something like 32mb?). > Really? Last I asked they said they basically created a new temporary

Re: Intent to ship: NetworkInformation

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > OK, so how would one use this API in practice? if (navigator.connect.downlinkMax > 100) { // perform low-priority background downloads } ___ dev-platform mailing list

Re: Intent to ship: NetworkInformation

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Andrea Marchesini wrote: > Our implementation of the NetworkInformation interface does not follow the > latest version of the spec. I'm planning to work on it. Then, I would like > to enable this interface by default - currently it's

Re: Intent to ship: NetworkInformation

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbar...@mit.edu> wrote: > On 12/15/16 11:23 AM, Ben Kelly wrote: > >> if (navigator.connect.downlinkMax > 100) { >> // perform low-priority background downloads >> } >> > > Why is the downlinkMa

Re: Intent to ship: NetworkInformation

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 12/15/16 3:28 AM, Andrea Marchesini wrote: > >> Spec: https://w3c.github.io/netinfo/ >> > > Is there any plan to have this turned into an actual spec, complete with > IPR commitments, testcases, wider review, etc? >

Re: Windows CPU power settings

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > The Windows 10 power settings appear to set the minimum CPU frequency at 5% > or 10% of maximum. When I cranked this up to 100%, artifact build time > dropped from ~170s to ~77s and full build configure dropped from ~165s

Re: Rust required to build Gecko

I tried ./mach bootstrap on a fresh m-c this morning and got: Will try to install Rust. Downloading rustup-init... Error running mach: ['bootstrap'] The error occurred in code that was called by the mach command. This is either a bug in the called code itself or in the way that mach is

Re: GCC 4.9 now required to build on Linux/Android

FWIW, it seems ./mach bootstrap does not install gcc 4.9 on ubuntu 14.04. On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote: > Bug 1322792 has landed on inbound, which changes configure to require > GCC 4.9 to build; our automation switched over to GCC 4.9 for our > Linux

Re: unowned module: Firefox::New Tab Page, help me find an owner

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:00 AM, David Burns <dbu...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On 22 March 2017 at 13:49, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> Finding someone to own the feature and investigate intermittents is >> important too, but that doesn't mean the tests hav

Re: unowned module: Firefox::New Tab Page, help me find an owner

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 9:22 AM, wrote: > I have not been able to find an owner for the Firefox::New Tab Page > bugzilla component (bug 1346908). There are 35 tests in the tree and > without anyone to assume responsibility for them when they are intermittent > (bug 1338848),

Re: unowned module: Firefox::New Tab Page, help me find an owner

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 9:39 AM, <jma...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 9:35:35 AM UTC-4, Ben Kelly wrote: > > You plan to delete all the tests? This seems somewhat extreme for a > > shipped feature. Why not disable just the tests that are inte

Re: Better download security through browsers

We now have SRI and support integrity attributes on elements like

Re: e10s-multi update and tests

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Andrew McCreight wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Nicholas Nethercote < > n.netherc...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > Do we have a clear definition of "content process"? I.e. does/will it > > include: > > > > - GMP processes (no?) > >

Re: windows build anti-virus exclusion list?

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote: > Yeah, the JS engine uses a lot more complex C++ features than the rest of > the code in our tree, so it takes longer to compile. This is also why the > `FILES_PER_UNIFIED_FILE` setting is lower in js/src than the rest

Re: windows build anti-virus exclusion list?

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote: > Back to the original topic, I recently set up a fresh Windows machine > and I followed the same basic steps (enable performance power mode, > whitelist a bunch of stuff in Windows Defender) and my build seemed >

Re: windows build anti-virus exclusion list?

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Ted Mielczarek <t...@mielczarek.org> > wrote: > > Yeah, I specifically meant "CPU-bound during the compile tier", where we >> compile all the C++

Re: windows build anti-virus exclusion list?

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote: > > The 14min measurement must have been for a partial build. With defender > > disabled the best I can get is 18min. This is on one of the new lenovo > > p710 machines with 16 xeon cores. > > Nope, full clobber

Re: windows build anti-virus exclusion list?

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > - mozilla-build install dir > - visual studio install dir > - /users/bkelly/appdada/local/temp > - /users/bkelly (because temp dir was not enough) > FWIW, adding all these extra exclusions

windows build anti-virus exclusion list?

Hi all, I'm trying to configure my new windows build machine and noticed that builds were still somewhat slow. I did: 1) Put it in high performance power profile 2) Made sure my mozilla-central dir was not being indexed for search 3) Excluded my mozilla-central directory from windows defender

Re: windows build anti-virus exclusion list?

.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Developer_guide/Build_Instructions/Windows_Prerequisites Thanks. Ben > > - mhoye > > > On Mar 16, 2017 20:34, "Ben Kelly" <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote:

Re: windows build anti-virus exclusion list?

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:05 AM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 11:40 PM, Michael Hoye <mh...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > Depending on your AV, if you don't exempt mozilla-central some of our >> tests will get quarantined and you wo

Re: Please write good commit messages before asking for code review

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> (Just continuing the thread here.) >> >> Personally I prefer looking at the bug for the full context and

Re: Please write good commit messages before asking for code review

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 02:46:53PM -0500, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > I review a large number of patches on a typical day, and usually I have > to > > spend a fair amount of time to just understand what the patch is doing. > As

Re: All the processes

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > Do I have any of these details wrong? Have I missed any? > We plan to ship a "worker" process that will run ServiceWorker (and eventually SharedWorker) threads as part of:

Re: All the processes

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > Now for the reason I raised this: the major downside of using multiple > processes is that it increases memory usage. Recent-ish measurements showed > that for e10s-multi we could probably go up to 4 content

Re: Heads Up: /storage upgraded from version 1.0 to 2.0

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > > This major version change is downgrade-incompatible, so IndexedDB and > > DOM cache won't work in an older version if their profile has been > > upgraded. > > IndexedDB is also used internally, so stuff that depends on it

Re: A reminder about commit messages: they should be useful

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > > That is why we have links to the bug. Bug should always be the unite of > > truth telling > > why some change was done. Bugs tend to have so much more context about > the > > change than any individual

Re: disabled non-e10s tests on trunk

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Joel Maher wrote: > All of the above mentioned tests are not run on Android (well > mochitest-media is to some degree). Is 4 months unreasonable to fix the > related tests that do not run in e10s? Is there another time frame that > seems

Re: disabled non-e10s tests on trunk

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Joel Maher wrote: > This is a discussion about tests in e10s mode, not WPT on Android. > Yes. And android is our last tier 1 platform that requires non-e10s. I think that makes it relevant to the discussion. > > What specific coverage are

Re: disabled non-e10s tests on trunk

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 4:29 PM, wrote: > While there are many tests which individually are disabled or lacking > coverage, these test suites have no non-e10s coverage: > * web-platform-tests > * browser-chrome > * devtools > * jsreftests > * mochitest-webgl, mochitest-gpu,

Re: 64-bit Firefox progress report: 2017-07-18

Chris, Do you know who controls this blog post? https://blog.mozilla.org/firefox/firefox-64-default-64-bit-windows/ The chart is really misleading. What does the vertical bar chart for "security" even mean? As noted on twitter: https://twitter.com/kylealden/status/897222041476005888 The bar

Re: disabled non-e10s tests on trunk

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:12 PM, <jma...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> In bug 1386689, we have turned them off. There was some surprise in >> doing this and some valid concerns expressed in comments

Re: Firefox and clang-cl

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 6:11 AM, Till Schneidereit < t...@tillschneidereit.net> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Julian Seward wrote: > > > On 13/08/17 03:40, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > > As you may have heard by now, Chromium has started to switch their > > Windows > > >

Re: Response.body streams landing on trunk, default off

FYI, the Fetch API side of streams has landed and is now in nightly. Please test and file bugs. Thanks! Ben On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > As some of you may know :till and :baku have been working hard to > implement Read

Re: Linking with lld instead of ld/gold

On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 5:08 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > To use it, you should have a clang >= 4.0 installed and lld installed > on the system. > clang is in charge of the LLD detection with its option -fuse-ld=lld > (this option is also supported by gcc since version 6).

  1   2   >