Index: Source/core/dom/shadow/ShadowRoot.cpp |
diff --git a/Source/core/dom/shadow/ShadowRoot.cpp b/Source/core/dom/shadow/ShadowRoot.cpp |
index e7dcc984865024fc57d1a6ff573ea073cf93abaa..990c5891bd376adc344d9773ea0a3ee2dc3d5caa 100644 |
--- a/Source/core/dom/shadow/ShadowRoot.cpp |
+++ b/Source/core/dom/shadow/ShadowRoot.cpp |
@@ -68,10 +68,12 @@ ShadowRoot::~ShadowRoot() |
ASSERT(!m_prev); |
ASSERT(!m_next); |
+#if !ENABLE(OILPAN) |
if (m_shadowRootRareData && m_shadowRootRareData->styleSheets()) |
m_shadowRootRareData->styleSheets()->detachFromDocument(); |
document().styleEngine()->didRemoveShadowRoot(this); |
haraken
2014/04/25 14:30:32
I wonder why these lines are not written in Shadow
Mads Ager (chromium)
2014/04/28 09:45:21
No, we shouldn't have this in removedFrom. We shou
|
+#endif |
// We cannot let ContainerNode destructor call willBeDeletedFromDocument() |
// for this ShadowRoot instance because TreeScope destructor |
@@ -230,7 +232,7 @@ ShadowRootRareData* ShadowRoot::ensureShadowRootRareData() |
if (m_shadowRootRareData) |
return m_shadowRootRareData.get(); |
- m_shadowRootRareData = adoptPtr(new ShadowRootRareData); |
+ m_shadowRootRareData = adoptPtrWillBeNoop(new ShadowRootRareData); |
return m_shadowRootRareData.get(); |
} |
@@ -333,4 +335,11 @@ StyleSheetList* ShadowRoot::styleSheets() |
return m_shadowRootRareData->styleSheets(); |
} |
+void ShadowRoot::trace(Visitor* visitor) |
+{ |
+ visitor->trace(m_shadowRootRareData); |
+ TreeScope::trace(visitor); |
+ DocumentFragment::trace(visitor); |
+} |
+ |
} |