Re: [webkit-dev] Proposal: remove style scoped

[Antti Koivisto]

I think it is a feature that we may want to have sooner or later. We will
probably want to change the implementation quite a bit though and removing
the dead code for now makes sense.


   antti


On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Benjamin Poulain wrote:

> Dear WebKit,
>
> We have an unmaintained implementation of the "scoped style" feature in
> the tree. (http://www.whatwg.org/specs/**web-apps/current-work/**
> multipage/semantics.html#attr-**style-scoped
> )
> It is getting in the way of improvements so I would like to remove it for
> now.
>
> From what I have found online, only Firefox ships the feature and it is
> not popular.
>
> Does anyone plan to finish the feature and ship it? If not, I will remove
> it soon-ish.
> We can always add the feature later if it becomes useful.
>
> Cheers,
> Benjamin
> __**_
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/**mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

[webkit-dev] Proposal: remove style scoped

[Benjamin Poulain]

Dear WebKit,

We have an unmaintained implementation of the "scoped style" feature in 
the tree. 
(http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/semantics.html#attr-style-scoped)
It is getting in the way of improvements so I would like to remove it 
for now.


From what I have found online, only Firefox ships the feature and it is 
not popular.


Does anyone plan to finish the feature and ship it? If not, I will 
remove it soon-ish.

We can always add the feature later if it becomes useful.

Cheers,
Benjamin
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] LLInt alignment problem on ARM

[Michael Saboff]

I’m wondering if the alignment is the traditional ARM vs Thumb 2.  The movw 
after lint_begin with hex  0xe30b3eef is a Thumb 2 instruction.

- Michael

On Sep 26, 2013, at 9:24 AM, Oliver Hunt  wrote:

> I believe that there’s a mnemonic that forces alignment that we could 
> (arguably should?) be using before these labels.
> 
> IIRC it’s something like .align N — if we aren’t doing this already we could 
> make the lint assembler backend emit a .align 16 prior to each global symbol.
> 
> —Oliver
> 
> On Sep 26, 2013, at 1:09 AM, Gabor Rapcsanyi  wrote:
> 
>> Hello!
>> 
>> I'm fighting with a strange LLInt alignment problem on ARM. As I see we put 
>> the LLInt code into .rodata section instead of .text.
>> Is there a specific reason why we are doing this? If there is not I would 
>> put them to the .text section.
>> 
>> Here is the objdump:
>> 
>> ./Source/JavaScriptCore/.obj/release-shared/llint/LowLevelInterpreter.o: 
>> file format elf32-littlearm
>> 
>> Disassembly of section .rodata:
>> 
>>  <_ZStL19piecewise_construct>:
>>  0:   andeq   r0, r0, r0
>> 
>> 0004 <_ZStL13allocator_arg>:
>>  4:   andeq   r0, r0, r0
>> 
>> 0008 <_ZStL6ignore>:
>>   ...
>> 
>> 0009 :
>>  9:   e30b3eefmovwr3, #48879  ; 0xbeef
>>  d:   e34b3badmovtr3, #48045  ; 0xbbad
>> 11:   e583str r0, [r3]
>> 15:   e3a0mov r0, #0
>> 19:   e12fff30blx r0
>> 
>> 001d :
>> 1d:   e1a0200emov r2, lr
>> 21:   e5852010str r2, [r5, #16]
>> 25:   e5951008ldr r1, [r5, #8]
>> ...
>> 
>> 
>> The problem is that these traditional instructions are lying on odd adresses 
>> in the .rodata section.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Gabor
>> 
>> ___
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
>> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
> 
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] LLInt alignment problem on ARM

[Oliver Hunt]

I believe that there’s a mnemonic that forces alignment that we could (arguably 
should?) be using before these labels.

IIRC it’s something like .align N — if we aren’t doing this already we could 
make the lint assembler backend emit a .align 16 prior to each global symbol.

—Oliver

On Sep 26, 2013, at 1:09 AM, Gabor Rapcsanyi  wrote:

> Hello!
> 
> I'm fighting with a strange LLInt alignment problem on ARM. As I see we put 
> the LLInt code into .rodata section instead of .text.
> Is there a specific reason why we are doing this? If there is not I would put 
> them to the .text section.
> 
> Here is the objdump:
> 
> ./Source/JavaScriptCore/.obj/release-shared/llint/LowLevelInterpreter.o: file 
> format elf32-littlearm
> 
> Disassembly of section .rodata:
> 
>  <_ZStL19piecewise_construct>:
>   0:   andeq   r0, r0, r0
> 
> 0004 <_ZStL13allocator_arg>:
>   4:   andeq   r0, r0, r0
> 
> 0008 <_ZStL6ignore>:
>...
> 
> 0009 :
>   9:   e30b3eefmovwr3, #48879  ; 0xbeef
>   d:   e34b3badmovtr3, #48045  ; 0xbbad
>  11:   e583str r0, [r3]
>  15:   e3a0mov r0, #0
>  19:   e12fff30blx r0
> 
> 001d :
>  1d:   e1a0200emov r2, lr
>  21:   e5852010str r2, [r5, #16]
>  25:   e5951008ldr r1, [r5, #8]
> ...
> 
> 
> The problem is that these traditional instructions are lying on odd adresses 
> in the .rodata section.
> 
> Regards,
>  Gabor
> 
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Changes in QtWebKit development

[Andreas Kling]

On Sep 25, 2013, at 12:40 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen  wrote:

> On Saturday 14 September 2013, Andreas Kling wrote:
>> On Sep 14, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen  
> wrote:
>>> That said, in all likelihood the Qt port will not remain part of WebKit
>>> forever, ...
>> 
>> (This being the main reason.)
>> 
>> Since you already know you’re eventually going to leave, you could just
>> move to a branch sooner rather than later. It’s unreasonable to expect
>> WebKit to accommodate a port that has no forward-looking interest in the
>> project.
>> 
> We do have a  branch tagged and being prepared for 5.2. It was taken before 
> the FTL merge and the following switch to require C++11 in all of the 
> project. 
> It will be very hard branch again after that point since we support 2-3 year 
> old platforms by default, and the Webkit project want to move to using the 
> latest and greatest compilers.

So you are saying that you'll never branch QtWebKit from WebKit trunk again?

> We also were not expecting much accommodation. Our continued engagement 
> should 
> mainly be seen as a gesture, we want to slowly pull out our code and help 
> clean up after ourselves. We don't have as many resources as Google so we can 
> not do that in just a few days, and since I am the one going to do so, I 
> prefer to tie up some loose ends and land the patches for review that affect 
> all of WebKit instead of just dropping everything and leaving. 

Google did not clean up after themselves, see:

https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2013-April/024388.html

"Adam and Eric offered to do some of this cleanup, but I think it's healthier
for people who will continue to be a part of WebKit to decide what gets cleaned
up, and execute on the plan.”

I think this should be handled the same way.

> If you feel the Qt port is a burden and in the way of major refactorings you 
> want to do, we could set a more specific time schedule for the transition. On 
> the Digia side we are just naturally hesitant due to emotional attachment to 
> WebKit and bad experience from the Nokia days with dropping a project before 
> its replacement is ready ;)

It’s commendable that you want to land your platform-agnostic patches before
withdrawing from the project, but assuming your last branch point is already
set, I don’t see why this necessitates keeping the Qt platform code around.

Your "emotional attachment" is nothing but EWS bots and rebaselines to me.

-Andreas
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

[webkit-dev] LLInt alignment problem on ARM

[Gabor Rapcsanyi]

Hello!

I'm fighting with a strange LLInt alignment problem on ARM. As I see we 
put the LLInt code into .rodata section instead of .text.
Is there a specific reason why we are doing this? If there is not I 
would put them to the .text section.


Here is the objdump:

./Source/JavaScriptCore/.obj/release-shared/llint/LowLevelInterpreter.o: 
file format elf32-littlearm


Disassembly of section .rodata:

 <_ZStL19piecewise_construct>:
   0:   andeq   r0, r0, r0

0004 <_ZStL13allocator_arg>:
   4:   andeq   r0, r0, r0

0008 <_ZStL6ignore>:
...

0009 :
   9:   e30b3eefmovwr3, #48879  ; 0xbeef
   d:   e34b3badmovtr3, #48045  ; 0xbbad
  11:   e583str r0, [r3]
  15:   e3a0mov r0, #0
  19:   e12fff30blx r0

001d :
  1d:   e1a0200emov r2, lr
  21:   e5852010str r2, [r5, #16]
  25:   e5951008ldr r1, [r5, #8]
...


The problem is that these traditional instructions are lying on odd 
adresses in the .rodata section.


Regards,
  Gabor

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev