We set pending visual scroll updates even for RSFs that are on subdocuments,
so we should ensure they get acknowledged and cleared on paints. Otherwise
the pending visual scroll update can get "stuck" and it affects things that
depend on it, such as the drag-selection code.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D88893
We set pending visual scroll updates even for RSFs that are on subdocuments,
so we should ensure they get acknowledged and cleared on paints. Otherwise
the pending visual scroll update can get "stuck" and it affects things that
depend on it, such as the drag-selection code.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D88893
By moving the few things that need to be exposed to other components
to APZPublicUtils.h, APZUtils.h becomes much less widely included
(and thus changing it triggers a quicker recompile) while retaining
most of its utilities.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D87404
Likewise for RepaintRequest, and direct usages of mScrollOffset
inside FrameMetrics.
The general idea is:
* APZ's copy of the FrameMetrics stores the visual scroll offset,
so calls to GetScrollOffset() on it are replaced with
GetVisualScrollOffset()
* The layer tree's copy of the frame metrics (and copies derived
from that like mLastContentPaintMetrics) currently stores the
layout scroll offset, so calls to GetScrollOffset() on those
are replaced with GetLayoutScrollOffset().
The latter changes are particularly important, as they enable us
to modify the layer tree's copy to store (a main thread snapshot
of) the visual offset in mScrollOffset in a future patch.
This patch intends no functional changes. In the cases where we
change GetScrollOffset() to GetLayoutScrollOffset(), mScrollOffset
and mLayoutViewport.TopLeft() should already be storing the same
thing.
The patch identifies a few usages as suspicious but leaves them
functionally unchanged for now.
A few problematic usages of GetScrollOffset() remain, which will
require other fixes to remove.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D87159
AFAICT the spec says that these layout scrollbars that take up no layout space that scroll the visual viewport do affect the size of the visual viewport. (Double check this)
Most other users don't care about the size of these special scrollbars.
I left nsIDOMWindowUtils::getScrollbarSize unchanged (NB different from nsIDOMWindowUtils::getScrollbarSizes which is modified by this patch) because I'm less sure. I will file a followup about it.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D85708
AFAICT the spec says that these layout scrollbars that take up no layout space that scroll the visual viewport do affect the size of the visual viewport. (Double check this)
Most other users don't care about the size of these special scrollbars.
I left nsIDOMWindowUtils::getScrollbarSize unchanged (NB different from nsIDOMWindowUtils::getScrollbarSizes which is modified by this patch) because I'm less sure. I will file a followup about it.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D85708
This patch basically attempts to make clicking in the scrollbar track outside of the scrollthumb "work". Clicking in the scrollbar track usually does a page scroll via nsSliderFrame::PageScroll. This eventually ends up in ScrollFrameHelper::ScrollBy where we turn the request from a relative one ("scroll by a page") into an absolute one ("scroll to this position").
This page scroll is typically a smooth scroll and is currently done on the main thread/layout side. Once we start scrolling the visual viewport offset with the scrollbars we can no longer do this purely on the layout side, we at least need the help of the compositor side. I think the simplest way to do this is to hand the scroll request off to the compositor and have it handle the whole thing.
Now we need to consider the following situation: user clicks scrollbar track to page scroll, smooth scroll gets partway complete on the compositor, user clicks again on scrollbar track for a further page scroll. The main thread can't send an absolute scroll offset update request to the compositor at this point because it has outdated information (it needs a 'starting position' to add the page scroll offset amount) so it'll end up scrolling to the wrong place. It has to send a relative scroll offset update.
We already have a mechanism to send relative scroll offset updates. It is implemented by sending a base scroll offset and the desired scroll offset, and then on the compositor send the difference between those two is computed and then added to the scroll offset.
This patch creates a new mechanism (so called "pure relative") that just sends a relative offset update without any absolute scroll positions. The reason I did this is because the existing relative scroll offset update mechanism is not aware of visual viewport offsets, but rather only layout scroll position. For example, here
https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/8d55e18875b89cdf2a22a7cba60dc40999c18356/layout/generic/nsGfxScrollFrame.h#446
the value we use for the base scroll offset (mApzScrollPos) is set to the layout scroll position. It may be entirely reasonable to make this existing mechanism vv offset aware, but I wanted to implement something to get it working with a smaller chance of regressions to things that already exist and work. Ideally these two mechanims would be merged.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D82688
This offset was reset in one of the two codepaths of D80723, but turns
out it's important for same-origin documents that are also
root-content-documents, like about: pages in the parent process, which
happened to hit the codepath that did _not_ reset it. :(
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D84584
Also: adjust include paths to be consistent for usages of various SVG headers,
and remove unused SVG includes (mostly for "utils" classes),
and drop stray "ns" from already-renamed SVG classes in various code comments.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D83140
Aligning the displayport position in large increments can cause issues when the displayport is small enough to be smaller than the alignment itself. The risk is higher for small frames with no displayport margin as the alignment might have previously be rounded up to 512. Luckily not having margins is an indication that we aren't trying hard to benefit from APZ and a large alignment isn't benefiting us. This patch takes that into consideration and defaults to small alignements when there is no margins. The alignment is also rounded to a multiple of 256 instead of 512 to further reduce the likelihood of running into issues with small displayports.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D80614
This should be equivalent because:
* Content viewer size and widget size should eventually be the same always
(modulo mid-resize, see bug 1645954).
* Only the root content document has a widget on android (the puppet widget).
* Only the root content document has a dynamic toolbar.
* We were only calling this on the root document, which has no parent pres
context (at least with e10s). Without e10s we could have a chrome
prescontext (not sure it that ends up being a parent in the pres context
chain), but we should never change the resolution of that one, so I think
aScaleContentViewerSize is just useless.
This avoids having two sources of truth by always checking the content viewer
size without subtracting the dynamic toolbar max size.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D80723
We did not pass FLAG_HIGH_QUALITY_SCALING down to the document used to
rasterize the SVG to a surface, resulting in embedded raster images to
not use high quality downscaling.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D56422
This avoids arbitrary precision loss when computing REM units and so on,
which is particularly important if we ever change the base of our app
units (but useful regardless).
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D79928
There's no need to put this in nsLayoutUtils since it's so closely bound
to presShell anyway. So we move it from being a static nsLayoutUtils function
that takes a PresShell pointer, to being a method on the PresShell itself.
Two functional changes here:
1. Don't run the MaybeReflowForInflationScreenSizeChange code unless the
visual viewport actually changes
2. Run the MaybeReflowForInflationScreenSizeChange if the visual viewport
is reset.
These functional changes can be logically thought of as "group the font-
inflation reflow stuff together with the other visual-viewport-triggered
reflow stuff".
Depends on D80040
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D80041
