Re: Reverting to VS2013 on central and aurora

2016-05-16 Thread Henri Sivonen 
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Benjamin Smedberg
 wrote:
> I am talking about requiring SSE2. That is a larger (but still quite small)
> population, but the upside of being able to turn on SSE2 optimizations by
> default is an important benefit. I've discussed and confirmed this with
> Firefox product management.
>
> So yes, the plan of record is to require SSE2 starting in Firefox 49, and I
> will update the tracking bugs to reflect that.

Excellent! Thank you! Yay for being able to use the vanilla Rust CPU
targeting config going forward.

For clarification: Does this decision apply to 32-bit x86 Linux as
well? (It would be sad to have to supply and maintain non-SSE2 x86
code paths just for Linux.)

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:01 AM, Robert Strong  wrote:
> The majority of this involves getting whether the CPU supports SSE. The app
> update part involves inserting the value into the url.
>
> Having said that, I've already started looking at this today. It would be
> good to know whether this info will be needed on other platforms at some
> point as well.

Regardless of what the answer is to the question above about requiring
SSE2 on Linux, it's safe to assume that the Linux updater, too, is
going to need to filter on SSE2 availability at some point.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivo...@hsivonen.fi
https://hsivonen.fi/
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

[Firefox Desktop] Issues found: May 9th to May 13th

2016-05-16 Thread Andrei Vaida 

Hi everyone,

Here's the list of new issues found and filed by the Desktop Release QA 
Team last week, *May 09 - May 13* (week 19).


Additional details on the team's priorities last week, as well as the 
plans for the current week are available at:


   https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/DesktopManualQAWeeklyStatus



*RELEASE CHANNEL*
none

*BETA CHANNEL*
ID  Summary Product Component   Is a regression 
Assigned to
1271642 
[Linux] Audio is not played back on gum test page
Core
Audio/Video: Playback
NO  NOBODY
1271922 
	Conversation window is narrowed when leaving call on guest side before 
sharing starts

Hello (Loop)
Client
YES NOBODY
1271958 
	"Disable video" and "Mute your audio" buttons move downwards when 
message field is dismissed

Hello (Loop)
Client
NO  NOBODY
1271906 
	White border in sharing panel after deleting previous created 
conversations from panel

Hello (Loop)
Client
YES NOBODY
1271896 
No icon for Your friend has joined in standalone
Hello (Loop)
Client
NO  Fernando Campo
1271892 
Wrong default name when editing room name
Hello (Loop)
Client
NO  NOBODY
1272652 
Firefox fails to import bookmarks from Chrome
Firefox
Migration
TBD Marco Bonardo


*AURORA CHANNEL*
ID  Summary Product Component   Is a regression 
Assigned to
1272408 
	Sometimes the content is moved up/down when scrolling from beginning to 
the end of the page

Core
Panning and Zooming
YES NOBODY


*NIGHTLY CHANNEL*
ID  Summary Product Component   Is a regression 
Assigned to
1271238 
	[Linux] Text is misaligned when pocket is moved to the menu panel and 
trying to save the New Tab Page

Firefox
Pocket
NO  NOBODY


*ESR CHANNEL*
none


Regards,
Andrei
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Reverting to VS2013 on central and aurora

2016-05-16 Thread Benjamin Smedberg 
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Henri Sivonen  wrote:

>
>
> For clarification: Does this decision apply to 32-bit x86 Linux as
> well? (It would be sad to have to supply and maintain non-SSE2 x86
> code paths just for Linux.)
>

Nobody asked about that, so it's wasn't specifically included.

IIRC the Mozilla builds of Firefox for Linux already require SSE2 by virtue
of their -i686 build targeting, so the real question here is whether we
want to support distros that don't require SSE2? I'm ok with that, but I
don't whether there are distros who want to disagree or how I'd communicate
this more effectively.

--BDS
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Reverting to VS2013 on central and aurora

2016-05-16 Thread Ralph Giles 
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Benjamin Smedberg
 wrote:

> IIRC the Mozilla builds of Firefox for Linux already require SSE2 by virtue
> of their -i686 build targeting, so the real question here is whether we
> want to support distros that don't require SSE2? I'm ok with that, but I
> don't whether there are distros who want to disagree or how I'd communicate
> this more effectively.

It's also not clear how many of the distros which technically target
i[345]86 actually function on non-SSE2 hardware. It's easy for
non-compliant binaries to slip in if there's no active testing for
this.

 -r
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Reverting to VS2013 on central and aurora

2016-05-16 Thread Mike Hommey 
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 01:53:51PM -0400, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Henri Sivonen 
> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > For clarification: Does this decision apply to 32-bit x86 Linux as
> > well? (It would be sad to have to supply and maintain non-SSE2 x86
> > code paths just for Linux.)
> >
> 
> Nobody asked about that, so it's wasn't specifically included.
> 
> IIRC the Mozilla builds of Firefox for Linux already require SSE2 by
> virtue of their -i686 build targeting,

They don't. They explicitly target the pentiumpro arch.

Mike
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Reverting to VS2013 on central and aurora

2016-05-16 Thread yuhongbao_386 
On Saturday, May 7, 2016 at 2:18:05 AM UTC-7, Emanuel Hoogeveen wrote:
> Well, I think that's debatable ;) The Athlon XP had clock speeds of up to 
> 2333MHz, though I'm sure the per-clock performance doesn't measure up to 
> current offerings. But Ion can easily be 5x as fast as Baseline. Of course, 
> whether that makes a difference depends on what JS you're running. But either 
> way, people with these processors are getting a double whammy of degraded 
> performance.
I wonder how a Northwood Pentium 4 running Ion would compare with an Athlon XP 
running Baseline.
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform