Make all setNeedsReattachLayoutTree happen from updateStyle.

Make all setNeedsReattachLayoutTree happen from updateStyle.

The setNeedsReattachLayoutTree calls which were done outside of
updateStyle were all accompanied by a NeedsReattachStyleChange for the
node marking the ancestor chain for recalc. Therefore we can simply
mark for re-attachment inside the recalcStyle pass instead.

Enforce the invariant by introducing a DCHECK that the we are inside
updateStyleAndLayoutTree, and that the shadow DOM distribution is
up-to-date.

R=nainar@chromium.org,esprehn@chromium.org
BUG=595137
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2760233004
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#458683}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/d6f8a937c0d8fbfcbdfe7edc93255e454c5de3cf

[rune, 2017-03-21 15:18:47]

The CQ bit was checked by rune@opera.com to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 15:19:15]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[rune, 2017-03-21 15:19:39]

The CQ bit was unchecked by rune@opera.com

[rune, 2017-03-21 15:27:25]

The CQ bit was checked by rune@opera.com to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 15:27:44]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 16:31:24]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 16:31:25]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux
(JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[esprehn, 2017-03-21 20:59:56]

NeedsReattachLayoutTree is in the default node flags, this patch still leaves
every new node as being marked. Did you want that?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2760233004/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2760233004/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp:728:
DCHECK(document().inStyleRecalc() &&
Can we use two DCHECKs so it's clear which side failed?

[rune, 2017-03-21 22:07:44]

On 2017/03/21 20:59:56, esprehn wrote:
> NeedsReattachLayoutTree is in the default node flags, this patch still leaves
> every new node as being marked. Did you want that?

No, I didn't notice that it was. I'll try to remove it.

[rune, 2017-03-21 22:24:08]

The CQ bit was checked by rune@opera.com to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 22:24:48]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[rune, 2017-03-21 22:25:15]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2760233004/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2760233004/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Node.cpp:728:
DCHECK(document().inStyleRecalc() &&
On 2017/03/21 20:59:56, esprehn wrote:
> Can we use two DCHECKs so it's clear which side failed?

Done.

[esprehn, 2017-03-21 22:34:17]

lgtm

[rune, 2017-03-21 22:39:40]

On 2017/03/21 22:34:17, esprehn wrote:
> lgtm

Thanks. This is depending on that other CL. Strictly, they belong together and
could've been merged. Do you want me to do that, or should we continue over at
https://codereview.chromium.org/2760953003 ?

[esprehn, 2017-03-21 22:40:30]

On 2017/03/21 at 22:39:40, rune wrote:
> On 2017/03/21 22:34:17, esprehn wrote:
> > lgtm
> 
> Thanks. This is depending on that other CL. Strictly, they belong together and
could've been merged. Do you want me to do that, or should we continue over at
https://codereview.chromium.org/2760953003 ?

Can we merge them? That other CL is so small, and this CL lets us add the
asserts.

[rune, 2017-03-21 22:45:08]

On 2017/03/21 22:40:30, esprehn wrote:
> On 2017/03/21 at 22:39:40, rune wrote:
> > On 2017/03/21 22:34:17, esprehn wrote:
> > > lgtm
> > 
> > Thanks. This is depending on that other CL. Strictly, they belong together
and
> could've been merged. Do you want me to do that, or should we continue over at
> https://codereview.chromium.org/2760953003 ?
> 
> Can we merge them? That other CL is so small, and this CL lets us add the
> asserts.

Done.

[esprehn, 2017-03-21 22:45:28]

lgtm

[rune, 2017-03-21 22:46:00]

The CQ bit was checked by rune@opera.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 22:46:39]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 23:15:17]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 23:15:18]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  ios-simulator-xcode-clang on master.tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/ios-simulator-xco...)

[rune, 2017-03-22 00:30:02]

The CQ bit was checked by rune@opera.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-22 00:30:54]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-22 02:33:44]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-22 02:33:45]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  ios-simulator on master.tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_TIMED_OUT, build hasn't
started yet, builder probably lacks capacity)
  ios-simulator-xcode-clang on master.tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_TIMED_OUT,
build hasn't started yet, builder probably lacks capacity)

[rune, 2017-03-22 08:17:10]

The CQ bit was checked by rune@opera.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-22 08:17:25]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-22 08:20:57]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 60001, "attempt_start_ts": 1490170630819040,
"parent_rev": "7bace48029ae6aac5c33304efaa943c029df7fed", "commit_rev":
"d6f8a937c0d8fbfcbdfe7edc93255e454c5de3cf"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-22 08:21:39]

Description was changed from

==========
Make all setNeedsReattachLayoutTree happen from updateStyle.

The setNeedsReattachLayoutTree calls which were done outside of
updateStyle were all accompanied by a NeedsReattachStyleChange for the
node marking the ancestor chain for recalc. Therefore we can simply
mark for re-attachment inside the recalcStyle pass instead.

Enforce the invariant by introducing a DCHECK that the we are inside
updateStyleAndLayoutTree, and that the shadow DOM distribution is
up-to-date.

R=nainar@chromium.org,esprehn@chromium.org
BUG=595137
==========

to

==========
Make all setNeedsReattachLayoutTree happen from updateStyle.

The setNeedsReattachLayoutTree calls which were done outside of
updateStyle were all accompanied by a NeedsReattachStyleChange for the
node marking the ancestor chain for recalc. Therefore we can simply
mark for re-attachment inside the recalcStyle pass instead.

Enforce the invariant by introducing a DCHECK that the we are inside
updateStyleAndLayoutTree, and that the shadow DOM distribution is
up-to-date.

R=nainar@chromium.org,esprehn@chromium.org
BUG=595137

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2760233004
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#458683}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/d6f8a937c0d8fbfcbdfe7edc9325...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-22 08:21:40]

Committed patchset #4 (id:60001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/d6f8a937c0d8fbfcbdfe7edc9325...