We used to do it this way effectively until I fixed it in bug 1400936.
Per the list of fuzz bugs that bug has in the "Depends on" field, some of those
without a super-clear fix, and others that aren't listed in there, and all the
complexity we had to deal with while receiving restyle requests mid-unbind, etc,
I think this is the right call.
This clears data on RestyleManager::ContentRemoved for non-anonymous nodes, and
on UnbindFromTree for subtrees rooted at anonymous nodes.
This will hopefully yield enforceable invariants.
MozReview-Commit-ID: IMwX5Uh1apv
We used to do it this way effectively until I fixed it in bug 1400936.
Per the list of fuzz bugs that bug has in the "Depends on" field, some of those
without a super-clear fix, and others that aren't listed in there, and all the
complexity we had to deal with while receiving restyle requests mid-unbind, etc,
I think this is the right call.
This clears data on RestyleManager::ContentRemoved for non-anonymous nodes, and
on UnbindFromTree for subtrees rooted at anonymous nodes.
This will hopefully yield enforceable invariants.
MozReview-Commit-ID: IMwX5Uh1apv
This also removes some confusing comments around nsIDocument regarding some kind
of "special" stylesheets, which don't seem to exist anymore, and consolidates
StyleSheetList so that we only have one implementation.
I think that fixes a potential leak on the shadow root code (even though the API
is v0 only), given the pointer from the ShadowRootStyleSheetList to the
ShadowRoot wasn't being CCd.
Also, more stuff could be renamed, methods removed, etc, feel free to suggest
more cleanup, I've done mostly the minimal.
Next steps are moving the stylesets there and stop using the proto binding sheet
list / resources.
MozReview-Commit-ID: D9hnDgPQAS5
This also removes some confusing comments around nsIDocument regarding some kind
of "special" stylesheets, which don't seem to exist anymore, and consolidates
StyleSheetList so that we only have one implementation.
I think that fixes a potential leak on the shadow root code (even though the API
is v0 only), given the pointer from the ShadowRootStyleSheetList to the
ShadowRoot wasn't being CCd.
Also, more stuff could be renamed, methods removed, etc, feel free to suggest
more cleanup, I've done mostly the minimal.
Next steps are moving the stylesets there and stop using the proto binding sheet
list / resources.
MozReview-Commit-ID: D9hnDgPQAS5
This is the actual fix, and makes sure that the state is consistent even if we
notify of state changes on a parent during unbind.
We potentially do a bit more work than needed given we set the document as the
root in that case instead of the parent which could potentially be the root
itself, but that's not a huge deal I think, given these cases are rare.
If this happens to be a perf problem, we may want to just drop the root during
UnbindFromTree if aNullParent == true and the root is a descendant of `this`.
MozReview-Commit-ID: A9d2igM0hMr
Signed-off-by: Emilio Cobos Álvarez <emilio@crisal.io>
The bug here is that we're clobbering a restyle root with another one which is
down in the tree, when calling NoteDirtyElement on the document element with the
flags already propagated.
This assertion would've catched it earlier, and make it more obvious.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 3mucQvr7A1x
