Sounds good to me. On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 7:07 PM Wanming Lin <wanming....@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi all, > > The CL <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3115849> > has been relanded and following's the new original plan: > > - Land the change to M95 - Done > - Allow the change to reach M95 beta (promoted Sep 23) > - Revert it on the M95 branch well before the stable cut/release (Cut > Oct 12) > - Get back to this thread with test reports on M95 beta > > Does that sound good to you? Looks like Philip is still on vacation, could > someone help notice the release managers about this plan? Or just help me > reach out the release managers. Many thanks! > > Thanks, > Wanming > On Friday, August 6, 2021 at 3:13:06 AM UTC+8 Chris Harrelson wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 9:28 PM Wanming Lin <wanmi...@intel.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Chris, Daniel and all, >>> >>> The blocker issue >>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1209717 has been >>> fixed now, and per above performance improvement @verwaest reported, can we >>> start testing on Beta again? >>> >> >> Sure, go ahead and experiment on canary/dev/beta, and then come back to >> us with any new findings. >> >> >>> >>> On Saturday, June 12, 2021 at 1:59:25 AM UTC+8 08629...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>>> Re:[blink-dev] Ineng to Ship:Remove clamping of set Up >>>> >>>> BGODL209B013 >>>> >>>> ในวันที่ ศ. 11 มิ.ย. 2021 09:13 Wanming Lin <wanmi...@intel.com> >>>> เขียนว่า: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> @verwaest reported at the revert CL >>>>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/2881077/2#message-2daf43353180fd00eff1ff8aa660f459c3189750>that >>>>> this change would improve Speedometer2 by 5-6% on the Apple M1 and ~3% on >>>>> our win10 perf bots. Thanks @verwaest! >>>>> >>>>> This is really a good improvement and a new impetus for us to push >>>>> this optimization forward. One block at present is the navigation >>>>> scheduling issue we reported: >>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1209717, which >>>>> has been open for a while and no new updates. Could someone help to push >>>>> it? Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> Moreover, is there other workaround solution to push the optimization >>>>> forward? >>>>> On Monday, May 17, 2021 at 3:17:48 PM UTC+8 Wanming Lin wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks Chris and Daniel, sorry I didn't explain clearly for the user >>>>>> reported issue, which is actually a chrome bug, even with 1ms clamp, this >>>>>> issue may still happen in some other scenarios, I've created a separated >>>>>> bug and explained the story at >>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1209717. PTAL, >>>>>> thanks! >>>>>> I think it's worth an another intent once this bug be solved. As it >>>>>> turns out, 1ms' clamp covers up some real chrome bugs. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Friday, May 14, 2021 at 3:44:33 AM UTC+8 Daniel Bratell wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> As Chris said, it's good that you managed to identify some >>>>>>> problematic areas during the beta phase. Of course it would have been >>>>>>> more >>>>>>> pleasant with no problems at all, but this was always a risky change. >>>>>>> Hopefully you can use these bug reports to figure out a version of this >>>>>>> change that doesn't cause those problems. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From a process point of view we will consider this intent "on hold" >>>>>>> until you think it is ready to try again. At such a time, just return to >>>>>>> this thread (or file a new intent if you think that would be cleaner). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> /Daniel >>>>>>> On 2021-05-13 19:55, Chris Harrelson wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for these data points. Are these the only bugs that were >>>>>>> filed? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd say these bugs are exactly the kind of interop problems we >>>>>>> should be worried about with this intent. Yes it's true that those sites >>>>>>> shouldn't depend on these relative timings, and it's technically a site >>>>>>> bug >>>>>>> if so, but if it is widespread enough it still represents a big enough >>>>>>> problem that it would block shipping this change in behavior. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Chris >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 1:24 AM Wanming Lin <wanmi...@intel.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you Philip! We actually received some regression bugs during >>>>>>>> initial trial, including several pinpoint performance regressions and >>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>> user reported scheduling issue. But we finally identify they are all >>>>>>>> caused >>>>>>>> by other issues after investigation. Following's the bug summary: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. Pinpoint regressions: >>>>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1179810 >>>>>>>> We identified the problem is with the perf story itself. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. en.wikipedia.org : User reports page is scrolled to the top >>>>>>>> after closing overlay: >>>>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1205285 >>>>>>>> This should be an navigation scheduling issue. >>>>>>>> On Thursday, May 13, 2021 at 3:40:33 PM UTC+8 Philip Jägenstedt >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Wanming, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This change has now been on beta for a time, and the revert on M91 >>>>>>>>> is in progress. Can you summarize what you learned from bug reports >>>>>>>>> coming >>>>>>>>> in? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>> Philip >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:00 AM Wanming Lin <wanmi...@intel.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> > Does that sound right to you? If so I can ask the release >>>>>>>>>> managers about this plan. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yeah, that sounds good! Thank you for your support! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 6:03:04 PM UTC+8 Philip Jägenstedt >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Wanming, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think the original timeline here won't work since your CL was >>>>>>>>>>> reverted and relanded so many times, and I think I also made a >>>>>>>>>>> mistake with >>>>>>>>>>> the branching, since a change landed *after* the M90 branch >>>>>>>>>>> point would never be in the M90 beta... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To bake in the the M91 beta, what we need to do is: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - Land the change soon before the M91 branch point, which >>>>>>>>>>> the latest reland >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/cd7dfaad25b9c93c440030fea8e441cf7bc39a5a> >>>>>>>>>>> did >>>>>>>>>>> - Allow the change to reach M91 beta (promoted Apr 22) >>>>>>>>>>> - Revert it on the M91 branch well before the stable >>>>>>>>>>> cut/release, let's say May 4 at the latest >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Exactly how much exposure on the beta channel that will give >>>>>>>>>>> depends on beta release dates, but it ought to be at least a week. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Does that sound right to you? If so I can ask the release >>>>>>>>>>> managers about this plan. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>>> Philip >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 4:27 AM Wanming Lin <wanmi...@intel.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> All, the CL has been landed at >>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/2730350, >>>>>>>>>>>> sorry for a bit delay due to another reverting during the period. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Philip, could you help to email the release engineers about >>>>>>>>>>>> this change? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 6:14:15 AM UTC+8 Philip >>>>>>>>>>>> Jägenstedt wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Good idea, Ian, I'll go ahead and do that. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 5:48 PM Ian Kilpatrick < >>>>>>>>>>>>> ikilp...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philip - if you could also email the release engineers >>>>>>>>>>>>>> directly about this change - that likely would be pertinent >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (just so this >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is on their radar in case things go wrong, and if a revert in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Beta is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed). >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ian >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 1:28 AM Philip Jägenstedt < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> foo...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Wanming, I'll review on the CL. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you check back in this thread on the week of March 22, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so that there will be enough time to discuss before the branch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 3:07 AM Wanming Lin < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wanmi...@intel.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philip, thanks for your comments! I've submitted the reland >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CL at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/2636507/, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please take a look. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, February 6, 2021 at 12:01:24 AM UTC+8 Philip >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jägenstedt wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Wanming, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The most straightforward way to test this on beta (and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> canary before that) would be to land the code right after the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> M90 branch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point (Feb 25) and then revert it some time well ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> M91 branch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point (Apr 8). The beta promotion should be around Mar 11, so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you should be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> able to get at least a few weeks on beta with this method. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, even if the beta baking does not reveal any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues, breakage due to this can be hard to understand, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could be in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code (libraries) that aren't easy to update. It would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prudent to make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this a finch-controlled experiment, to avoid a potential >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> urgent revert in a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point release. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LGTM3 to trying this on beta with whichever method you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer at the moment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philip >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 3:34 AM Wanming Lin < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wanmi...@intel.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Alex, Chris, very glad to see this great progress! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > You have my LGTM1 to flag this on for Beta for one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release, and as we get evidence back from that, we'd ask you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to report it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here. On the basis of that update, we'll then potentially >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approve a stable >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> launch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since I'm new to intent-to-ship process, could you please >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guide me or provide BKMs on how to flag this on for Beta for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one release, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and what kinds of testing should be covered? Any chromium >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> program could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> help test and evaluate the impact? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Besides, I am thinking of leveraging chrome://histograms/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to count the use of setTimeout(..., 0) from some hot >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> websites, then we can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do some basic testing to check if there's obvious >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regression. Does it make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sense? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wanming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, February 5, 2021 at 4:16:37 AM UTC+8 Chris >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Harrelson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LGTM2 for testing on beta and coming back to the API >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> owners with the results. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 12:15 PM Alex Russell < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sligh...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the clarification, Geoffery. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wanming: we discussed this again at today's API OWNERS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meeting and, given what Mike and Ben noted here, we'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see this bake >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a while on Beta to shake out any potential compat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues. You have my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LGTM1 to flag this on for Beta for one release, and as we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get evidence back >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from that, we'd ask you to report it here. On the basis of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that update, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'll then potentially approve a stable launch. Does that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sound good to you? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, if you have any more data as to why this change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> improves things for users and developers, that would also >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be helpful. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, February 1, 2021 at 12:01:42 PM UTC-8 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> geoffrey garen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note: http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/17156/webkit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not the change that added the minimum timeout clamp. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> r17156 *reduced* a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pre-existing 10ms clamp to 1ms. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, January 29, 2021 at 7:22:28 AM UTC-8 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wande...@chromium.org wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also note that if you nest setTimeout(..., 0) enough >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (5 times?) then you start getting 4ms clamping anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So this is really >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about the first 4 or so setTimeout(..., 0) calls in a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chain. I don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this intent is removing the 4ms clamping for nested >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> timeouts. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 10:20 AM Ben Kelly < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wande...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Its possible folks are using setTimeout(.., 0) as a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> setImmediate() replacement which would result in high >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers. But that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use case would not be adversely impacted by removing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this clamping. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 4:01 AM Yoav Weiss < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yo...@yoav.ws> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 9:54 AM Wanming Lin < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wanmi...@intel.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks all for your comments! I've created a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WebKit issue at: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=221124 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The main motivation of this intent-to-ship is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to correct the scheduling and reduce potential >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> performance impact. We >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't find impact on live sites with/without 1ms >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clamp maybe they‘ve >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already avoided the usage of setTimeout(..., 0) since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatible risk is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really existed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we have numbers on how often `setTimout(... ,0)` >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is used? (use counters, HTTPArchive, cluster >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> telemetry, etc) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > What about setInterval? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since remove 1ms clamp exits risk, we'd like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change setTimeout at first and base on discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result to see if it's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonable, if yes, we can apply it at setInterval as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next step. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, January 29, 2021 at 6:14:07 AM UTC+8 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Taylor wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Howdy, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In general, I think if Firefox has been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ship this behavior it's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> likely web-compatible (modulo different code >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paths being served behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UA sniffing). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There have been subtle race-y JS timing bug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> differences between sites in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Firefox and Chrome that my old team (at Mozilla) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> looked at, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unfortunately I don't have any links to back that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up. So there is some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk that sites are (unintentionally) relying on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the old behavior. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, aligning with Firefox (and the HTML >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> standard) on this seems >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good -- more so if WebKit is willing to do so as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A few questions: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What about setInterval? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will setTimeout and setInterval be consistent wrt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clamping after this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposed change? (see also >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1646799#c0) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/28/21 2:28 PM, Alex Russell wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > +mike taylor who may have insight into the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> potential compat risks, given >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > the different behavior between Gecko and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WebKit/Blink. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On Thursday, January 28, 2021 at 4:53:47 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-8 Manuel Rego wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On 27/01/2021 03:01, Lin, Wanming wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Safari: 1ms clamp (WebKit's clamp at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/main/Source/WebCore/page/DOMTimer.cpp#L384 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/main/Source/WebCore/page/DOMTimer.cpp#L384> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/main/Source/WebCore/page/DOMTimer.cpp#L384 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/main/Source/WebCore/page/DOMTimer.cpp#L384>>) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Have we checked with WebKit if they have any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plans to change this or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > at some point? Is there a WebKit bug report or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Maybe you can ask for signals in webkit-dev, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > https://bit.ly/blink-signals < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bit.ly/blink-signals> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Bye, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Rego >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > You received this message because you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> receiving emails from it, send >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > <mailto:blink-dev+...@chromium.org>. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/025bd7a7-6be1-4b77-9c3a-32bb6b295812n%40chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/025bd7a7-6be1-4b77-9c3a-32bb6b295812n%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emails from it, send an email to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/5c1d6691-1ccd-4451-a491-56990ecc695fn%40chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/5c1d6691-1ccd-4451-a491-56990ecc695fn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emails from it, send an email to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CACj%3DBEhAvLduQ6XXA-Vm-8%3DTM9L-d5q1_h-DrvrKLHg8NBvxEQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CACj%3DBEhAvLduQ6XXA-Vm-8%3DTM9L-d5q1_h-DrvrKLHg8NBvxEQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emails from it, send an email to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/095fc193-27e5-4a7c-b816-edbab7eb176cn%40chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/095fc193-27e5-4a7c-b816-edbab7eb176cn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYfU0La%3D3Fpd%3DHBVQ2phHuvMSozpOsXqt-NR-mtWepRJPQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAARdPYfU0La%3D3Fpd%3DHBVQ2phHuvMSozpOsXqt-NR-mtWepRJPQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>> send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/2869319d-e852-4f3b-8471-611f6ae7c9b4n%40chromium.org >>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/2869319d-e852-4f3b-8471-611f6ae7c9b4n%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw8JUEZDbfNsmXJWhcz_N7zcRwzoips2r_DzMEqhctwr1g%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw8JUEZDbfNsmXJWhcz_N7zcRwzoips2r_DzMEqhctwr1g%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>> >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/b155d685-4b7e-498b-8e8a-1e9c95d4195an%40chromium.org >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/b155d685-4b7e-498b-8e8a-1e9c95d4195an%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>> >> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/f2f1d2cf-0b9b-4ed4-ac0e-4f7d9a20e4c1n%40chromium.org >>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/f2f1d2cf-0b9b-4ed4-ac0e-4f7d9a20e4c1n%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "blink-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/cb9aacdf-dc28-42b0-90cd-6c0faec080ffn%40chromium.org > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/cb9aacdf-dc28-42b0-90cd-6c0faec080ffn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw8C6TxNspC%3DTQEnym4HK28Qo5AU_%2BHZsHgc3d-CC1e_tg%40mail.gmail.com.
