Hi, Prasanta.
Since this is the second regression of JDK-8130892, my suggestion was to try to
revert all of these fixes and check that such changes are really necessary. Do
we really need to change the check from
"d.width <= 0 || d.height <= 0" to "d.width <= 0 || d.height <= 0", and do wee
need a flag?
I do not suggest to re-implement the fix, but recheck that we will not
integrate on more regression.
----- [email protected] wrote:
>
Hi Sergey,
>
It seems the hidpi issue of the test is because of JDK-8178025
<https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8178025> where we calculate the
fontmetrics because of scaleChange
>
/jdk10-b33/bin/java JEditorPaneLayoutTest
> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Wrong size
java.awt.Dimension[width=180,height=10] expected java.awt.Dimension[width=180,height=44]
> at JEditorPaneLayoutTest.main(JEditorPaneLayoutTest.java:87)
>
>
jdk10-b34/bin/java JEditorPaneLayoutTest
> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Wrong size
java.awt.Dimension[width=181,height=10] expected java.awt.Dimension[width=180,height=44]
> at JEditorPaneLayoutTest.main(JEditorPaneLayoutTest.java:87)
>
Since all the regression tests for this issue like
>
javax/swing/plaf/basic/BasicTextUI/8001470/bug8001470.java,
javax/swing/JTextArea/ScrollbarFlicker/ScrollFlickerTest.java and the present
test
is passing with the fix and I have already created a JBS issueJDK-8229222
<https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8229222>to work on the test issue,
which is not directly related to this fix, can we check this in and I work on the JBS
issue subsequently?
>
Regards
Prasanta
>
On 09-Aug-19 2:43 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>
>
Hi, Prasanta.
>
I have one additional suggestion. I think we need to check the whole
related sequence of bugs
>
>
0) JDK-8001470 - The bug which is unrela6ed to the current bug, but it is
introduce the test from which we start the step (1)
>
1) Initial bug was reproduced on Solaris 11 only:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130892
As a fix the check for "uninitialized" state was changed, but it was
caused next regression
>
>
2) https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160246 , it also reproduced only on
Solaris and this is the fix where we added the "rootViewInitialised" flag, but
it cause next regression
>
2) Current bug https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8226513
>
>
And you already found by the test that it dose not take into account the
fact that the GConfig may be different when you calculate the size for
invisible component, and the size after it is became visible, probably ithe fix
itself does not take into account this?
>
It is also quite interesting to check the root cause of the JDK-8130892 :
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130892?focusedCommentId=13822701&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13822701
>
I doubt that negative size is a correct value for the component.
>
>
----- [email protected] wrote:
> >
OK +1 from me !
> >
> > -phil.
> >
> >
> > On 8/8/19 2:23 AM, Prasanta Sadhukhan wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 07-Aug-19 9:42 PM, Phil Race wrote:
> >
I have a minor quibble that "rootViewInitialized" is no longer a
very appropriate variable name,
> > since it is not just about initialization.
> > Can we rename it to "rootViewNeedsLayout" ?
> >
> >
Renamed.
> >
> > Also because the windows 10 issue has a different cause,
potentially this test can be adjusted
> > to allow some tolerance to tell the difference between
> > "not re-layed out at all", and "I'm a few pixels off in my
expectations".
> > ie the test should be about "did I relayout?", not "is my preferred
size exactly the actual size?".
> >
> > Could this be a hi-dpi issue ? Are you running at 96 dpi or
something else when this fails ?
> >
> >
Yes, it is. I have modified the jtreg command line to test in uiScale
1. It now pass in windows and others and fails without the fix.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psadhukhan/8226513/webrev.02/
Regards
> > Prasanta
> >
> > -phil.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/7/19 2:04 AM, Prasanta Sadhukhan wrote:
> >
I confirm that the test pass on linux and mac with the fix and
fail without the fix. Only on windows, it fails.
> >
But I also see that the failure is not because of the fix. The
"problem" was there even before the fix, for example with jdk13 (fails with
jdk11, jdk12 too )
> >
jdk13-b24/bin/java JEditorPaneLayoutTest
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException:
Wrong size java.awt.Dimension[width=183,height=10] expected
java.awt.Dimension[width=177,height=44]
> > at
JEditorPaneLayoutTest.main(JEditorPaneLayoutTest.java:84)
> >
which got somewhat improved by JDK-8217731
<https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8217731>
jdk13-b25/bin/java JEditorPaneLayoutTest
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException:
Wrong size java.awt.Dimension[width=181,height=10] expected
java.awt.Dimension[width=180,height=44]
> > at
JEditorPaneLayoutTest.main(JEditorPaneLayoutTest.java:84)
So, the 1 pixel difference in width was there even before this
fix and also this fix fixes the height of the basic text component and the unit
tests of JBS works ok, so to me this fix looks ok to me.
+1 for the fix from me and
> >
I have added the test to problem list only for windows to
figure out the 1 pixel difference in width which seems to be because of
layouting in windows.
> >
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psadhukhan/8226513/webrev.01/
Regards
> > Prasanta
> >
> > On 22-Jul-19 4:01 PM, Prasanta Sadhukhan wrote:
> >
Hi Semyon,
> >
> > Although the JBS testcase is passing with your change,
your testcase is failing even with the fix for me in windows10
> >
> > java.lang.RuntimeException: Wrong size
java.awt.Dimension[width=181,height=44] expected
java.awt.Dimension[width=180,height=44]
> > at
JEditorPaneLayoutTest.main(JEditorPaneLayoutTest.java:84)
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Prasanta
> >
> > On 17-Jul-19 1:33 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> >
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8226513
> >
> > webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/8226513/webrev.00/
> >
> > The fix adds resetting the root view initialization
flag when the text component underling document is changed and also removes the check
for the zero component size for the root view initialization to correct the resulting
preferred component size in some scenarios when the root view need to be initially
layouted.
> >
> > --Semyon
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
